It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
That's true. There are a LOT of people on social media who share articles and information with the click of a finger, regardless of how bogus or impossible it may seem. It's real sad.
But that's a small part of a long film, and as I said, I'm lenient on these things, in part because I think there is something great about the showmanship of breaking the fourth wall or acknowledging the audience from time to time.
1. Bond and Mr. White’s reunion
2. PTS
3. Train fight
4. SPECTRE meeting
5. Snow plane chase
I'm with you 100%. I've had my fill of Mendes and will be open minded enough to give the next guy a fair chance, no matter who that might be. Please, let's see what someone else can bring to the table.
I don't rate Mendes at all. The only two decent Bond directors in the franchise for the past 40 years are John Glen and Martin Campbell, and they both were fortunate to direct more than one film.
Mendes has also been given the opportunity to direct more than one film, but IMO he did an ok job with one film, and messed up the other one completely. He isn't a good Bond director.
It's just under two years, which is still an incredibly long time. Give it three or four months max and that'll likely change.
Which ones have you seen? In a lot of his films there's humour and lighter moments. I can think of a few bits in Inception and in his Batman movies that come to mind. I think a lot of the movies that tried to ape the success of the Dark Knight movies went tried to be as dark and gritty as possible for the sake of it and it did get annoying but I think those people misunderstood what made Nolan's films successful.
I don't get what you mean by a sterile tone either. And I wouldn't say many of his films are bleak or depressing at all. Dark sure but not bleak. There's nothing depressing about Batman finally finding happiness or Churchill's speech being read out over the soldiers from Dunkirk being welcomed back as heroes.
Interstellar was probably his weakest film, and even that was really well made and emotional. And Dunkirk was like nothing he'd done before and he knocked it out of the park. I don't think it's fair to say that all his films are the same whatsoever, and with the amount if variety and the risks he's taken on his films I don't think it's fair to say any of us know how he'd approach Bond.
And I really don't get why people keep saying they want a "lighter" film when all the Craig films have had funny bits and the last two in particular have managed to strike a great balance and bring back a bit of that tongue in cheekness with the one liners and all that. I don't want a Marvel style quipfest. Even the Roger Moore movies had a genuine sense of danger and violence to them in a lot of scenes. Bond needs to have that edge imo.
I understand not wanting it to be personal, just Bond on a mission, no more traitor subplots and trust issues and all that stuff, but that has nothing to do with how "dark" the film is.
I think Skyfall, while not devoid of funny bits, ultimately comes across as not light at all, not only --perhaps not even mainly-- because of the dramatic ending, but also because there is a slightly cold, clinical, detached feeling to the film, and it has a deliberate pace and a sense of "stillness", as if you were watching a drama instead of an action thriller. Also, Bond comes across as slightly muted in his emotions, even a bit stiff.
Quantum of Solace is, by comparison, funnier, not too funny, but funnier, and unlike Skyfall, it has so much energy and moves so quickly that it feels more alive. I like it better. Spectre needs no explanation regarding its sense of humor.
True but I think after the success of SF we can expect bigger, poppier names for the foreseeable.
I don't know, I just get this feeling of laxity on their part, that is partially reflected by the fact the films are released further apart than back in the day.
I also agree that his films have quite a bit of humour sprinkled within them (especially the Bat trilogy) which I quite enjoy, while still having dramatic heft. Interstellar was a bit on the heavy side for me, but I don't see how they could have avoided that given the 'time' and family aspect.
I found the humour in SF very enjoyable. Honestly I have never understood the comments I've read here about it being too heavy going. M's death scene is right at the end and I don't know about others, but I didn't get all teared up about it (I didn't think highly enough of her to get worked up about her death). In fact, I didn't understand why Bond was balling so much over her either. Still, as I said, it was at the end. I quite liked the humour in QoS as well. It was a bit more subtle, but was still there. If B25 handles it like either of these two films, I will be very happy.
I didn't like the humour in SP one bit however. To my eyes it just seemed tacked on for effect, and the delivery was flat (especially Craig imho). It was like a whole film worth of 'Circle of Life' from SF (the worst part of that film).