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
Almost certainly a weaker actor, craig is a once in a generation great.
What went wrong in many places is SP. Where the idea was right to get less drama in (and I think that's what Craig intended) that was the only thing Mendes was actually able to achieve and "force" into the picture where it totally did not belong. Mendes did everything he could with SF and he should not have let himself lured back ... to me he kida destroyed his 007 reputation with SP. And I am sure Brothergate and many things like that were what Craig and Mendes clashed at during production plus Mendes - at least it appears this way in the final product - delivered maybe 50% of the enthusiasm during SP's production. At least that is my impression.
Except the last two Bond films are two of the most commercially successful (in terms of gross) ever. With Skyfall being THE most successful Bond film ever.
So a lot of people watched them. A lot of people watch the Kardashians, doesn't make them quality tv though.
If you look at the best/most memorable scenes, it's where he is p@ss@ed off but still trying to get things done (gallery scene, M's house, banter with new M, Q and A scene etc), he pulls these scenes of perfectly
I think this is reflected with RM as he brought his own charm, warmth and wit to character of Bond. The writers need to learn from this and keep DC within the "comfort zone" IMHO
True, but the claim was about the longevity of the franchise not quality. I made no comment on their respective quality. I don't like The Eagles, doesn't mean they haven't been a successul band.
From a financial perspective then yes. They are fundamentally in business to make money.
This is 100% true, and I mentioned something similar in another thread not long ago. Rarely do we see Craig being himself in the role, which is why his interpretation isn't that successful IMO. You are right, those scenes truly let Daniel shine through in the character, and they made his Bond very compelling. There just wasn't enough of them. In QoS for instance, he is pretty much in mourning throughout the entire film, and Craig is forced to portray that instead of being himself and leaving his own mark (and in CR he has to play a rookie which was a bad move because Craig is at home when he is slightly bitter and jaded towards the world). There is nothing that really draws you in to his interpretation, outside of those scenes were he is allowed to show a bit of natural personality. And that resonates because it is actually genuine of the man himself.
SP was a stumble in the right direction, but it wasn't enough. They came close to finally making what felt like a Bond film, only to balls it up. I'm starting to feel as if they no longer know how to make Bond films.
You saying Craig's other Bonds don't feel like Bond films?
The fact that we have only seen this side of the character explored within one movie out of four tends to indicate that it was just pot luck and the writers haver made little or no effort at creating a character that best fits in with DCs strengths.
Yes, I am saying exactly that.
Maybe Craig does care about 'his' Bond but that doesn't necessarily make him knowledgeable about the character as a whole.
If Fiennes had enough clout to nix M being a traitor then Craig certainly he had enough to stop brothergate in its tracks. That he didn't speaks volumes about how much EONneed to get a grip.
Very true. Never forget we here are as insignificant to EON as that pigeon dropping you just walked past on the street.
As long as the numbers add up who gives the slightest toss about brothergate or the Scooby gang taking over?
Feel like Bond films to me.
The UK press were very enthusiastic about Spectre on its release.
Precisely. I’m all for people venting, but it’s certainly not the ‘end of days’ scenario some people paint it as.
SF is the least traditional one, I would like it infinitely better if it would have been as consistent as its two predecessors.
SP has a lot of traditional elements, but it´s put together really badly. I watched a bit of it the other night, and the music in the Lake Althaus scene completely destroyed the atmosphere, and I will never get over it that the mountain panorama around the clinic is left invisible by the cinematography, the scenes there could also be from an average tv film.
Not the end of days, but it certainly isn´t captivating.
Perhaps not for some fans, but the projection of their malaise onto the general audience is disingenuous.
Either that or they just can't deliver it right now due to business dynamics. Either way it's regrettable, because I've never felt such a clear cut need to blaze a significantly new path since DAD. This isn't about box office (neither was the last Brosnan effort, which made good money globally). It's about catching the mood.
The one thing I can say about the Brosnan and Dalton eras is that they didn't overstay their welcome. For whatever reason, they fortuitously ended when they should have imho.
From my perspective they can take another six months to a year if they want to. Just get it right. There's a lot at stake.
Amongst fans.
I agree completely. The mood is moving further away from where it was when Craig got the role, which is the difficulty. I don't think Craig represents the times anymore, and hasn't since SF (but I can atleast understand why they kept him for SP). I think if they continue with Craig the next film will be another decrease at the box office, as it will be incredibly hard to get people energised after another four year wait with seemingly little change.
No, not entirely. Remember SP was 4 years ago (by the time B25 releases), and made significantly less than SF. To say the audience doesn't care either way is disingenuous.
Surely satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the final product isn't governed by box office?
DAD outperformed LTK - what's your point? The two things are utterly separate from each other otherwise Transformers and the Fast and Furious films would be heralded as great works.
Well I never thought I'd see the day we'd have producers who could think that nicking the plot of Austin Powers 3 was acceptable yet here we are.
Who's to say black Bond/female Bond/gay Bond/Muslim Bond/wheelchair Bond isn't on the table now?
There’s nothing to suggest there is a groundswell of support for Craig’s departure amongst the public, if there were you’d have heard about it in the press. Some people don’t like him, others do, some are ambivalent.
I haven’t seen anything to suggest dissatisfaction amongst the general audience to the point they’re clamouring for change. I’m sure they’d embrace change as much as the next man, but I’ve seen no evidence to speak of that it’s foremost in their minds when they (arguably once every 6 months) think about Bond.
The handling of Blofeld was dreadful, but like @Getafix said, I believe it can be swept under the carpet. I severely dislike it, but I’ve made my peace with it. I’ve no doubt EON realise they dropped a bollock with that angle. The solution - tighten the reigns on your director.
There is a prevailing need and mood for reinvention. He is a fundamental component of that, because more than any other Bond actor before him his entire narrative is connected.
The two go hand in hand. Moreover, as we theorized a few pages back, old man Bond is played out.
With respect to Craig, all his off the air shenanigans have polluted his image amongst a large component of the public. Many know of wrist slash, his negative comments about Bond, the character's misogyny and his desire for more money. Whether true or not, those articles had two years of play. People internalized it. He knows that. Which is why he's been trying to address it recently. A case of too little, too late.
Bond films always make money so that's not the concern, but the enthusiasm is not there. A director can't change that, unless it's Nolan.