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
In a lot of ways this is a cautionary tale for what we do as a society constantly, over and over again, which is empower people then take it away and then act shocked when it blows up in our faces. We’re empowering and weaponizing a trigger-happy alcoholic with mommy issues.”
I was able to watch there.
Thanks mate.
(NSNA>FRWL (video game) > this.)
Sorry, had to.
Something about Adi Shankar rubs me the wrong way. First, the Power Rangers short and getting in trouble with Saban, now James Bond and getting in trouble with MGM. Just looking at the guy tells me he seems to be more concerned with attention than anything else:
It was a very interesting take on Bond (and Power Rangers), that is for sure. I'm just wondering what this guy's true endgame is.
In the interview video in the original post, Shankar says that while enjoying Casino Royale and Skyfall, he felt those were a combination of Bourne and Batman, not Bond. I'm not terribly sure I understand that. But he raises some interesting points about a guy who loves his drink, his girls and (perhaps) violence getting old -- what would that guy do? I am interested in that subject, but I just don't necessarily agree with his view on where James Bond is today.
Eh, the more I write about it, the more I feel I'm just looking too much into it.
So it's more than some attention grabbing IMO - what is the percentage of Youtube viewers who've seen a French/Belgium movie ? The Punisher has 7 M views, but Venom "only" has 700.000...
He has some money, or some ability to obtain some people to work for him, and he uses it for fan fiction of a new kind. Four short movies all interesting to watch, that's already quite a feat.
Somehow, I could imagine he's like a young Alan Moore who chose Youtube instead of comics to deconstruct popular heroes. Turns out they are both the kind of person you'll notice if you cross their path in the street because of the way they look, but in the meantime Moore at least is definitely not someone who seeks attention for the sake of it. Sometimes you look like something out of the box, because well, you think out of the box.
NO! I'm doing a full write up on this tomorrow, but for now - this isn't James Bond. Nothing about this character is Bond. The "I know you don't the money" line is what struck my nerve, and I will do everything in my power to lay waste to this.. well.. waste.
The ONLY redeeming quality was the gadgets at the beginning, I thought the air grenades were a fresh idea. And the name is actually pretty good. But the character is all wrong.
I think it's more due to the fact that he could actually make money of this. There are tons of fan films on Youtube and MGM won't take them down no matter what their take on Bond is.
But this one has actually attracted some publicity and, if it got as many views as his other films (which it easily could have done) he could have actually stood to make some money of it. MGM wouldn't care if a fan made a film that bastardised the character and it got no views. But if it got millions of views, then it would be an issue, because someone would be making money off a character they own.
http://www.fastcocreate.com/3043120/watch-a-dark-10-minute-james-bond-film-by-the-guy-who-made-last-weeks-power-rangers-revamp
But it works for Connery's Bond. But believe it or not, I actually think Roger Moore would have been the best fit for this film.
This film shows what happens to the cinematic Bond, the jetsetting playboy who loves his job, once he retires. He's desperately trying to recapture his glory days, resorting to taking on some random assassination job, but then in the end he realises that it's not the same thing (at the end where he says he won't ask for forgiveness, he knows he made a mistake).
Roger Moore was the Bond who seemed to love his job the most. He loved being a globe trotting secret agent, so to me this seems like what would happen to him. Eventually forced to retire, tries to recapture his glory days despite being way too old (like when he tried to pick up the girl in the bar, and it turned out the only reason she gave an old man like him the time of day was because she was a prostitute), even going as a far as to kill a man despite not knowing who he was or what he's supposedly done, before realising he's made a big mistake that he'll never forgive himself for.
I thought it was a really good, stylish looking, short film but it would have been even better if they'd used a different actor.
I do believe that Shankar has used his money and connections to produce some very interesting content, and I do have respect for the work he has put out. Perhaps I'm a little more irked in his treatment of the Bond character? Or perhaps his opinion of the last few movies?