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
It’s not a lack of news, people are just A) Dicks, or B) have little to nothing happening outside of this forum.
As I understand it, Collateral was rather ham-fisted in its political depictions, among other issues. She didn't write it, but she did direct it. Between that and other considerations, I have to agree with @PanchitoPistoles in spirit (perhaps not exactly in tone). She's not right for Bond.
Absolutely...the fact that cr67 shit is even mentioned on here is disgusting.
Also 'Knives Out' is a detective ,cluedo mansion affair,so there wont be any action in it,at least with Craig.
That would have been a stipulation with B25 being sorted out,so a quick filming time and no risk to DC means he will be fine for B25 and no delay.
I don't agree with this, Craig has undoubtedly given Bond a more layered portrayal than a good number of actors in the role, especially Brosnan. I think his acting is just too subtle for some, the quiet torment of his performance is in his body language and eyes.
Brosnan has none of this and rarely showed any conflict in his portrayal, it was quite one dimensional and he only attempted to add depth rarely and when he did it was quite embarassing. You might not hate Craig but you have a real problem with him being referred to as highly as he is.
Craig is the one actor that has not had all the tropes to portray the character until SPECTRE, I'd like to see what Brosnan would have done without the safety net of all the tick the box moments of the series, without that greatest hits direction they took with him from TND onwards.
They did try something different with him for GE but obviously didn't feel comfortable so just went to default setting and just churned out substandard Roger Moore entries and never asked him to stretch himself much.
Fair enough if you want something very familiar with no gear changes but some of us wanted something different and Craig delivered a layered portrayal that tapped into a lot of what Fleming wrote. Also Craig has played different aspects to the character he just doesn't do it with all the subtelty of a sledgehammer.
I'm sick to death of hearing people say Craig is stone faced and has no change in the character it's there it's just not sign posted for you or put up on the screen screaming at you in block capitials.
I take it that you didn't see it, by the way that was phrased. It was about as ham-fisted as any other BBC thriller. It reminded me a lot of State Of Play, in a good way. It was exceptionally well-directed.
Of course, I'm not sold on Clarkson when it comes to Bond - she may not be a good fit at all despite what I've seen of her work being more than stellar. That notwithstanding, the current logic being applied to the argument of why she definitely is not is bafflingly inane and childish.
Interested to hear these "other considerations", for arguments sake.
Agreed-- an excellent actor, and excellent Bond. I think some have been influenced by others (media reporting, or the constant slagging on this thread), but as @RC7 said above...
FOR YOUR EYES ONLY - best film of 1981
Bill Conti - best score of 1981, yes I prefer his score to Williams’
Alan Hume - best cinematography (Greece and Corfu have never looked more alluring)
Raiders destroys FYEO.
I cant download it on my bloody laptop !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Ah yes, the old "If you don't like it, it's because you're too stupid to grasp it.
The funny thing is, I could say a lot of people miss Brosnan's depth, but I wouldn't call them stupid for doing so.
The Matrix Reloaded had a fantastic score.
@Shardlake is not calling anyone stupid-- I know this guy, and he is NOT saying you, me , or anyone is stupid. He's made a thesis that right now DC is being beaten up by false reports in the media, one weaker film, more slanderous and unsubstantiated reports in the media... and, he rightly suggests, GE presented a fresh Bond, but they decided to default to Moore-lite for the rest of the PB era.
I agree, but I also believe the reason they went backwards with Brosnan is because of his ability-- he wasn't a complex Bond like Dalton, he was the Cali-Bond (with an accent to match). It's my opinion that he could not stretch far enough to give varied performances (as someone who posted TAFFIN showed-- or watching his dramatic scenes in Bond and beyond...)....
Shardlake was not being offensive. He has a clear point. Don't twist this into something it's not-- there's too much of that on this forum.
Best,
P
So no, probably shouldn't do that after all.
Very true. I have nothing against Craig or his fans. I just can't stand the hyperbole and arrogance, to suggest he is simply better than the other actors who played Bond? Not "my favourite", but "the best". If he's definitely the best, then why does he struggle to step out side his comfort zone, with results like SP? Roger Moore always played Bond for laughs, but when he was called upon to play a scene "straight", he could do it more than convincingly. It wasn't his strength, but he could still pull it off. I don't get the sense that Craig can pull off the comedic, or ladies man Bond. He can only do broken Bond well, or up and comer (CR). This is not necessarily a knock against him, that's fine, it just annoys me to hear arrogant hyperbole about how he the best ever, without ever feeling the need to back a statement like that up. I don't hate Craig, I just appreciate what the other actors brought to the role too. I also think that Bond 25 would be better off without him, as the directors like Chris Nolan will all be waiting to direct a Bond soft-reboot. No one want to be the guy to close out the Craig era, four years after the lacklustre SP. EON dug themselves into a hole here, no one else, and the only director they'll be able to find for this thing will be someone hungry enough, and desperate enough for a big job. Not the directors that have a pile of scripts to pick and choose through. Some might say this is a good thing, going back to a lesser known filmaker, but I think Craig going out on a average nuts and bolts adventure will actually seem pretty limp after such build up, and how the rest of his tenure is so different. Returning to that would be more effective in a reboot, where the shift in style would accompany a new actor.
You're correct.
The sane voices have gone running for the hills.
The rest have stayed.
Which is my way of saying: I'm out.
My manager's wife was one of the producers on American Animals, which means, I've been told a little more of the insight that goes into EoN approaching a director and why.
We have Colonel Sun, kicked in the goolies every time he comes on. He's just telling it like it is; but there's one voice that whips up a frothing frenzy, with his three or four disciples. CS has clarified everything-- and has done so for weeks-- but is only now believed (and vindicated) because Variety and James Bond Live reports it is so. He's been saying everything, all of this (against the grain of losing release dates, re-boots and all of that nonsense), the entire time. He has, in other words, been the most consistent voice on this thread.
In the past, the Colonel's been called a liar; more recently some smart ass said he had said nothing new. Wow, how insulting to @ColonelSun...
@RC7 has rightly said there is plenty of news.... And he's right.
But as @RC7 has pointed out, the peeps who don't want to hear the news are either A$$holes or; they've got nothing more going in their lives beside this forum.
This thread has been turned into an attack on Craig and BB, and on some woman-- who's talented enough to make it in an unforgiving business-- because of her glasses... Seriously??? Her glasses??? Jesus-- Too much from those who know too little.
There are so many great people on this forum, from the Mods to the people who PM'd the Colonel and myself. But the vocal minority has twisted this thread (and others) into a clusterf&*K.
I'll sign in to read the voices of the friends I've made. But, to the happiness of some, I have nothing more to add to this dialogue.
Best of luck.
I can always be reached at [email protected]
P
I’d probably have to go back to TLD-LTK-GE. All 3 are well-made with a great story and very entertaining and rewatchable. Even though admittedly LTK is the weaker of those 3 and doesn’t crack my top 10 (the other 2 do). And even though at times LTK lacks that Bond flavor and feels a bit too “American action” it still packs a punch in the action department and has an engaging story and is rewatchable. Plus it beautifully ended the Cubby era with that lovely closing ballad by Patti LaBelle. That song always gets me.
Unfortunately since then we haven’t had a three-peat like this. TND is fun and rewatchable but TWINE unfortunately is not (despite having a stronger story). CR and SF are sabotaged by QOS. And then there’s SP :(
Bond needs to find its mojo the way M:I has done.
Sorry to see you go. I'm tempted to do the same. I come back after 5 years and its a shame its to this.
+1
The fact he rarely actually does any work - I.e. acting - hasnt helped either. I suspect his relatively stilted performance in SP reflects the fact he had been away from the day job for quite a long time.
imagine an artist who hasn't painted for 3 years or a surgeon whose been on a 2 year sabbatical. the first canvas or patient are probably heading straight to the incinerator