Are the Komodo Dragons the silliest things in the Craig era so far?

13468915

Comments

  • Posts: 6,601
    Maybe not in Germany. Dunno, never stumbled over it.
  • Posts: 15,125
    RC7 wrote: »
    I bumped into an old work colleague this week, a Drama Producer who I respect very much. We naturally got chatting about Bond and SP. I posed him the question 'What's the silliest thing about the DC Bond's?'. His response, 'Skyfall'. He thinks CR is a classic and enjoys QoS a lot. I'm finding more and more people feel this way recently. I personally prefer SF to QoS, but this is certainly becoming a common theme among those I talk to. Silva's plan and Bond's decision making being the key turn offs, or 'silly' moments.

    Very strange, considering SF received enthusiastic reviews and QOS had a lukewarm reception. I do agree about Silva's plan. Not so much silly as contrived near the end. But as I said I blame Logan for it.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,718
    Ludovico wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    I bumped into an old work colleague this week, a Drama Producer who I respect very much. We naturally got chatting about Bond and SP. I posed him the question 'What's the silliest thing about the DC Bond's?'. His response, 'Skyfall'. He thinks CR is a classic and enjoys QoS a lot. I'm finding more and more people feel this way recently. I personally prefer SF to QoS, but this is certainly becoming a common theme among those I talk to. Silva's plan and Bond's decision making being the key turn offs, or 'silly' moments.

    Very strange, considering SF received enthusiastic reviews and QOS had a lukewarm reception. I do agree about Silva's plan. Not so much silly as contrived near the end. But as I said I blame Logan for it.

    I think QOS is a film that gets better with repeated viewings. The film goes by so fast it's tough to notice everything on the first watch.
  • SarkSark Guangdong, PRC
    Posts: 1,138
    Ludovico wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    I bumped into an old work colleague this week, a Drama Producer who I respect very much. We naturally got chatting about Bond and SP. I posed him the question 'What's the silliest thing about the DC Bond's?'. His response, 'Skyfall'. He thinks CR is a classic and enjoys QoS a lot. I'm finding more and more people feel this way recently. I personally prefer SF to QoS, but this is certainly becoming a common theme among those I talk to. Silva's plan and Bond's decision making being the key turn offs, or 'silly' moments.

    Very strange, considering SF received enthusiastic reviews and QOS had a lukewarm reception. I do agree about Silva's plan. Not so much silly as contrived near the end. But as I said I blame Logan for it.

    No one will dispute Skyfall was extremely well-received. It's entirely possible for opinions to change over time. There's many many movies that were panned upon release that were latter considered classics. The opposite is true as well.
  • Posts: 15,125
    Ludovico wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    I bumped into an old work colleague this week, a Drama Producer who I respect very much. We naturally got chatting about Bond and SP. I posed him the question 'What's the silliest thing about the DC Bond's?'. His response, 'Skyfall'. He thinks CR is a classic and enjoys QoS a lot. I'm finding more and more people feel this way recently. I personally prefer SF to QoS, but this is certainly becoming a common theme among those I talk to. Silva's plan and Bond's decision making being the key turn offs, or 'silly' moments.

    Very strange, considering SF received enthusiastic reviews and QOS had a lukewarm reception. I do agree about Silva's plan. Not so much silly as contrived near the end. But as I said I blame Logan for it.

    I think QOS is a film that gets better with repeated viewings. The film goes by so fast it's tough to notice everything on the first watch.

    I think so too. I rewatched it last weekend and while it is a messy movie there's still a lot to love. SF is far more polished, but sometimes too much.

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    QoS definitely gets better with repeated viewings. I think the fast pace and editing really took people (non-Bond fans) out of the experience during first watch in the theatre, and I'm quite sure that over the intervening years, it's acquired a following as people revisited it on Blu ray post-SF's success.

    Dare I say, this movie could end up being a cult classic of sorts, due to its slightly original approach, and particularly if SP ties together some loose ends plot-wise.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,718
    @bondjames I think of all the Bond films made since 1995, QOS will be the one to improve the most in the future and achieve the underrated cult status that LTK and OHMSS achieved in the decades following their release.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited February 2015 Posts: 23,883
    Totally agree @DaltonCraig007.

    It's like those tv shows that don't do too well at first, are cancelled, and then acquire a following later in syndication and no one understands why they were cancelled in the first place.

    QoS is "slow burning. It never goes out. Just like a sleeper."
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited February 2015 Posts: 15,718
    I wouldn't be surprised if one day EON will offer Forster to direct another Bond film. If he isn't hit with another writer's strike, he could strike gold with a 2nd outing.
  • Posts: 4,617
    Well, I will dust off the DVD and give it another go
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    I thought they did offer him the follow-up, and he declined, but said he wouldn't never say never.....just that he wanted a break from it for a while.

    I think Craig and he developed a good working relationship, as they had to write some of the movie together, so I'm sure they bonded (no pun intended).

    I agree, he could strike gold with #2. The only real problem with QoS is the editing and some of the dialogue (writer's strike to blame here). If those items are fixed, Forster's debut is excellent.
  • Posts: 15,125
    I wouldn't be surprised if one day EON will offer Forster to direct another Bond film. If he isn't hit with another writer's strike, he could strike gold with a 2nd outing.

    I still think he had a questionable approach sometimes. I would praise others for what QOS got right. Especially the cast, which was amazing. But the only truly awful thing about QOS was the theme song.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited February 2015 Posts: 23,883
    Ludovico wrote: »
    But the only truly awful thing about QOS was the theme song.

    While I don't want to make excuses for that abomination, I've often wondered if that song was meant to be garbled, jumbled & angry sounding like that.....intentionally.....to reflect Bond's confusion and anger in the movie.

    I hear elements of YKMN from CR in some of the cords, but somewhat disjointed, which is why I thought this.

    Or perhaps I'm over analyzing and it was just unintentionally awful :-?
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,718
    I much prefer QOS' theme song than DAD's. :D
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,718
    TND is very blah indeed, IMO because the end credits song is just so much better.
  • Posts: 15,125
    I much prefer QOS' theme song than DAD's. :D

    You cannot beat Madonna at being bad. However hard you try.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited February 2015 Posts: 15,718
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I much prefer QOS' theme song than DAD's. :D

    You cannot beat Madonna at being bad. However hard you try.

    Indeed, no matter how hard she tried, Halle Berry wasn't as annoying as Madonna's cameo.
  • Posts: 11,189
    Hmm...I'm not sure about that :p

    "I'm soo gooood"

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Both these "thespians" are at the bottom of a very deep barrel as far as I'm concerned. We're splitting hairs.
  • edited February 2015 Posts: 1,394
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I wouldn't be surprised if one day EON will offer Forster to direct another Bond film. If he isn't hit with another writer's strike, he could strike gold with a 2nd outing.

    I still think he had a questionable approach sometimes. I would praise others for what QOS got right. Especially the cast, which was amazing. But the only truly awful thing about QOS was the theme song.


    There is a lot more wrong with QOS besides the theme song.

    1) Awful AWFUL editing during the action scenes.

    2) Boring incoherent plot.

    3) Very little humour.

    4) M showing up in Bolivia to have Bond taken into custody ( wtf? Why did she have to travel there? Its a common problem with the Craig films giving M too much screen time )

    5) Have i mentioned the awful editing?

    6) Villains are pretty forgettable.

    7) Parachute scene is ridiculous.

    8) Action climax is probably the worst of the entire series.Nothing really is at stake.What the hell is up with having that hotel in the middle of the desert anyway? Even if it hadnt blown up it would have closed due to extremely low business.

    9) Bond leaves Fields ( an inexperienced field agent mind ) alone in the hotel where enemies are close by and know they are staying.Surprise surprise she ends up dead.What a hero.

    Still better than Skyfall though.

  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,553
    Why don't you tell us how you feel about Skyfall?
  • Posts: 15,125
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I wouldn't be surprised if one day EON will offer Forster to direct another Bond film. If he isn't hit with another writer's strike, he could strike gold with a 2nd outing.

    I still think he had a questionable approach sometimes. I would praise others for what QOS got right. Especially the cast, which was amazing. But the only truly awful thing about QOS was the theme song.


    There is a lot more wrong with QOS besides the theme song.

    1) Awful AWFUL editing during the action scenes.

    2) Boring incoherent plot.

    3) Very little humour.

    4) M showing up in Bolivia to have Bond taken into custody ( wtf? Why did she have to travel there? Its a common problem with the Craig films giving M too much screen time )

    5) Have i mentioned the awful editing?

    6) Villains are pretty forgettable.

    7) Parachute scene is ridiculous.

    8) Action climax is probably the worst of the entire series.Nothing really is at stake.What the hell is up with having that hotel in the middle of the desert anyway? Even if it hadnt blown up it would have closed due to extremely low business.

    9) Bond leaves Fields ( an inexperienced field agent mind ) alone in the hotel where enemies are close by and know they are staying.Surprise surprise she ends up dead.What a hero.

    Still better than Skyfall though.

    We disagree on what is awful. Strongly. I didn't like the editing, but not to the point of finding it awful. The plot of QOS was actually very interesting and especially the villain's scheme, which was by far one of the most original in the last 30 years I would say. There was little humour, but that is not necessarily a bad thing, especially since the humour was very good. M showing up in Bolivia may have been questionable, but it was to have them interact together and in the same room. M has been showing around on the field since at least YOLT. The villains are actually brilliant, Greene is admirably creepy. The parachute scene was badly executed, but to the point of being awful? The action climax was really solid, and a coup d'état with the complete control of a vital resource, I call this something at stake and something of importance. Not to mention the scam of not one, but two superpowers in the meantime. As for Bond leaving Fields alone... She was inexperienced, but still an agent, and although a mistake he had things to do elsewhere and she was a grown up girl. And he got the bollocking from M for the mistake he made. In any case, it was not the first time we had a sacrificial lamb as a Bond girl.

    If QOS is awful, then what the heck is DAD?
  • Posts: 7,507
    Not that I care much... But of all the things to complain about, Bond getting a girl killed is probably not the most appropriate. Bond gets a girl killed unnecessarily in at least half of the films... ;))
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    edited February 2015 Posts: 7,553
    jobo wrote: »
    Not that I care much... But of all the things to complain about, Bond getting a girl killed is probably not the most appropriate. Bond gets a girl killed unnecessarily in at least half of the films... ;))

    If anything, M got Fields killed by sending her, an attractive woman, to collect Bond and put him on a flight back to London. The next morning. Given Bond's history, hard to imagine him not implicating her somehow?

    Mummy's been very bad!
  • Posts: 1,552
    jobo wrote: »
    Not that I care much... But of all the things to complain about, Bond getting a girl killed is probably not the most appropriate. Bond gets a girl killed unnecessarily in at least half of the films... ;))

    If anything, M got Fields killed by sending her, an attractive woman, to collect Bond and put him on a flight back to London. The next morning. Given Bond's history, hard to imagine him not implicating her somehow?

    Mummy's been very bad!
    Exactly, M could have sent a man or someone who Bond wouldn't be attracted to - or someone who actually had field training (pardon the pun).
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,553
    JCRendle wrote: »
    jobo wrote: »
    Not that I care much... But of all the things to complain about, Bond getting a girl killed is probably not the most appropriate. Bond gets a girl killed unnecessarily in at least half of the films... ;))

    If anything, M got Fields killed by sending her, an attractive woman, to collect Bond and put him on a flight back to London. The next morning. Given Bond's history, hard to imagine him not implicating her somehow?

    Mummy's been very bad!
    Exactly, M could have sent a man or someone who Bond wouldn't be attracted to - or someone who actually had field training (pardon the pun).

    She obviously learned her lesson the second time when she came herself with four or five armed agents (which still didn't work) :P

    It's quite clear that on many occasions M goes through the motions as part of her job but ultimately trusts Bond to get the job done on his own terms because she knows he's effective.
  • Posts: 15,125
    JCRendle wrote: »
    jobo wrote: »
    Not that I care much... But of all the things to complain about, Bond getting a girl killed is probably not the most appropriate. Bond gets a girl killed unnecessarily in at least half of the films... ;))

    If anything, M got Fields killed by sending her, an attractive woman, to collect Bond and put him on a flight back to London. The next morning. Given Bond's history, hard to imagine him not implicating her somehow?

    Mummy's been very bad!
    Exactly, M could have sent a man or someone who Bond wouldn't be attracted to - or someone who actually had field training (pardon the pun).

    I guess Bolivia was a bit out of the radar for MI6 and they only had Fields. Tragic irony for M, Bond and of course Fields.
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,585
    I don't think M is the one who sent Fields. She knew of it, but it seemed that it was a directive from elsewhere, where the CIA pulled the strings. Fields was naked under her coat at the airport...in that climate her outfit was ridiculous. So her orders were to seduce him: I'm not sure M would do that. But Geoffrey Beam would.
  • Posts: 15,125
    TripAces wrote: »
    I don't think M is the one who sent Fields. She knew of it, but it seemed that it was a directive from elsewhere, where the CIA pulled the strings. Fields was naked under her coat at the airport...in that climate her outfit was ridiculous. So her orders were to seduce him: I'm not sure M would do that. But Geoffrey Beam would.

    We don't know if she was naked, she could have as well worn a miniskirt. There are no reasons whatsoever to even think Beam gave her orders. Fields was MI6, not CIA. And however close both secret services are, however important is the special relationship, no MI6 agent would take direct order from a CIA agent.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,553
    TripAces wrote: »
    I don't think M is the one who sent Fields. She knew of it, but it seemed that it was a directive from elsewhere, where the CIA pulled the strings. Fields was naked under her coat at the airport...in that climate her outfit was ridiculous. So her orders were to seduce him: I'm not sure M would do that. But Geoffrey Beam would.

    True that it may not have been M that sent her. I'm like 99.9% sure Fields wasn't naked under her coat at the airport though. :))
Sign In or Register to comment.