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
Ok it's not a classic moment but it does raise a smile everytime I've seen it (lost count exactly how many years ago ;-) ).
I agree. I think this is often lost in the criticism of the editing and camerawork etc.
Craig's performance in QoS is very good indeed. And yes, I think he captures that idea of throwing yourself into a mission/job to escape personal pain (and secure vengeance/closure) very well.
But to get back to QOS. I just love this film. Not a single boring moment, the action scene are breathtaking and the more 'quiet' scenes are interesting, epic cinematography and Craig is simply a true badass in this film.
DC can do just about anything and it's riveting. He did a commercial for International Women's Day (no need to post You Tube link) in which he dressed as a woman and didn't say a word. And he STILL commanded attention. The man just oozes style and charisma.
Has your opinion of Dan softened over the years, @DaltonCraig007? It seems that at least for QoS you've found new things to appreciate that you might not have years previously. I feel like I've done the same thing with the Moore era in recent years, partly from your influence.
CR brought the drama and the grit and such a deserved revival (of sorts) to the series that it needed after DAD and that four-year hiatus, but QoS just revved everything up to an 11: Bond is even more fragile and damaged, connecting with the equally damaged Camille (also underrated, and would truly be one of the only Bond girls I'd be totally cool with returning at some point), the action sequences were breathtaking throughout (minus a few spotty CGI moments during the airplane sequence), and it simply delivers. That's it. It's one of those films I can put in and be completely satisfied by every single time.
The people claiming that QOS would be talked about were right, at the very least.
The only thing I can think of is when Guy Haines's bodyguard falls from the roof of the opera house, after the tussle, Bond gives his tux jacket a nice, stiff tug to straighten it out.
Totally understandable! Not everyone has to agree. It's a bit of a motto we've created over the years, because it would be dreadfully boring around here if we all had the same opinions. Plus, if this was 31 pages of QoS fans debating the film with QoS haters (in a nice, respectful, fun manner), that would be just as fine. I'm up for any debate, as long as it can be level-headed.
That's extremely great to hear, @DaltonCraig007, and while my feelings on the Moore era haven't improved as exponentially, there was still a big change than went on in regards to my opinion of the era recently.
While rereading some of my earliest posts I made on this forum a few years back, I almost choked on my tongue at the sheer pompousness of some of my statements. I reeked of a Connery fanboy off the handle, and seemed to hate any Bond actor or Bond film that didn't live up to his golden four during his era, sparing only Craig's films in my onslaught. And, because Moore's era was so different from the brutal, calculating Bond I'd loved in Connery's take on the character, it was an easy target for my then naive mind.
A year or so after those tirades I did a run through of the Moore era, giving them a second chance after hearing members such as yourselves washing the films in glory. Sure enough, over time my opinion of the era went from "they're rubbish," to "they've got their moments." I enjoyed the macabre tension and supernatural flair of LALD, the epic scale and exotic visuals of TSWLM, and a more earnest and hardened Bond in FYEO, amongst other things. The cinematography popped, the stunts were in a class of their own, and the opening title songs are for my money, the best of the series in consistency.
Moore's Bond now holds a place in my heart not only as one of the most roguishly charming 007s right up there with Sean's, but also the most cultured of the lot. I love hearing his Bond go on and on about the cultures of the many places he's visiting, expounding his vast knowledge of everything from the best drinks and foods to extremely esoteric factoids that could only become known by a man who'd lived in up everywhere he went. And with Moore's Bond, you really do get the feeling of a man who has been everywhere and experienced all the treats the world had on offer. I'd love to see a Bond in our more modern age that shows off such knowledge every once in a while like Sean was known to do every once in a while and which Moore capitalized on during his era.
Because life's too short to dislike things.
Great post!
I've always said if you can't enjoy a good Rogering, well, one way or the other, you're buggered.
The Moore movies are about pure unadulterated enjoyment.
And great tunes as well. Feel sorry for those who are unable to feel pleasure from Sir Rog. There must be something wrong with them as it's definitely not due to any inadequacy in the Roginator's performance.
Makes me feel sad for the rest.
3:-O
Sorry @Getafix but that made me cringe quite a bit #-o
I like the sound of that.
At this point I think it's a given DC will return after bond 25
3:-O
I had to look form my anti depression pills. three more movies sweet deity of some sorts.....
;)
For those ready to highlight that Roger was considerably older:
Take a look at Moore in TMWTGG and then take a look at Craig in SF (46 and 43 respectively). One of them has aged much faster, and it isn't Sir Roger.
I like a veteran looking Bond as much as the next guy, but if nu-EON is focused on making more "realistic" Bond films, they won't want Craig in the role when he's 53 going on 70. He definitely looked damn near 50 in SF, in my opinion.
Only Craig can know what his body will endure. If he's willing to cut back on doing so many of his own stunts, Craig could conceivably do four more.
But hey, who knows what the future holds, as Dr. Steve Brule always says.
This is true, but my understanding is that Sony's involvement is likely over after SP. In this case, if a new studio comes in, they may have other ideas for our favourite spy. Sony came in when Bond was recast with Craig and they were involved in that process from what I recall (Amy Pascal supported and signed off on Craig) so there are bigger factors potentially at play (i.e. moola) and of course, DC may not want to continue after B25, particularly if Mendes does not stick around (I think he will pack it in once he's exhausted the character's growth arc personally).
Yes, if it comes out in 2018.
Amazing that Moore was able to fit in 7 and Craig will only get in 5 during the same time frame due to the length it takes to get things done these days.
Even if he does only 5 though, I think he'll be up there with Connery/Moore as one of the benchmark Bonds. He'll likely get knighted too at some point like those two, given he's already helped HRH out during the Olympics.
Regarding QOS, i think Calvin Dysons review of it on youtube is the most accurate assessment of the film.Bear in mind that he does like Craig and CR and thinks QOS is by far the worst Bond film ever made.
Craig looks younger now than he did during Skyfall, and happier too. He seems alot more relaxed, not paranoid like he was for the first two. So you have an actor that is comfortable in the role and millions of people around the world that want to see him play Bond. It would be madness not to throw money at him for AT LEAST one more.