SPECTRE Trailer/TV Spot Thread - NEW TV Spots Page 117 - Final Trailer Page 106

16791112119

Comments

  • Posts: 1,552
    antovolk wrote: »
    The guy from AJB may have seen a very early version given he was posting about no action when Rome was still being filmed. So in that space they may have peppered a few action shots in which I hope is the case.
    How early on in the Rome filming did the AJB member start posting about seeing the trailer?
  • Posts: 725
    maxcraig wrote: »
    smitty wrote: »
    One thing to emphasize the drama end, but Mendes can be pretentious and forget who Bond's audience is. 99.9 % of the audience doesn't give a damn about Mendes' arty stuff. They want a Bond in action on a mission, not a bunch of expensive talking heads. This is coming days after IM5's trailer and if it is just talky drama, they are going to be blasted on the net with the poor comparison. It will be as the kids say, a Fail. Hope that leak from AJB was wrong.
    Rather sweeping statement considering you haven't seen the teaser yet, and based on rumour only.
    Moreover, Sam Mendes gave us Skyfall which earned $1.1 Billion at the box office, so I think the man knows what Bond is, and what the audience expects

    This site is almost nothing but comments and opinions on rumors. And I think Mendes, while competent, is very lucky. My .02 is that CR was the superior film so I'm not impressed with SF's BO. Any decent long delayed Bond filM would have likely done as well or close to it.

  • how can someone on here have seen the trailer. I don't believe that at all. They has to be action, it would be not a great well to sell the film for fans.
  • Posts: 229
    smitty wrote: »
    maxcraig wrote: »
    smitty wrote: »
    One thing to emphasize the drama end, but Mendes can be pretentious and forget who Bond's audience is. 99.9 % of the audience doesn't give a damn about Mendes' arty stuff. They want a Bond in action on a mission, not a bunch of expensive talking heads. This is coming days after IM5's trailer and if it is just talky drama, they are going to be blasted on the net with the poor comparison. It will be as the kids say, a Fail. Hope that leak from AJB was wrong.
    Rather sweeping statement considering you haven't seen the teaser yet, and based on rumour only.
    Moreover, Sam Mendes gave us Skyfall which earned $1.1 Billion at the box office, so I think the man knows what Bond is, and what the audience expects

    This site is almost nothing but comments and opinions on rumors. And I think Mendes, while competent, is very lucky. My .02 is that CR was the superior film so I'm not impressed with SF's BO. Any decent long delayed Bond filM would have likely done as well or close to it.
    I agree CR is superior.
    It's not hard, any Bond films that stay true to Fleming novels are always better than original stories.


  • Posts: 4,619
    aaron819 wrote: »
    The guy from AJB says "If we get a teaser soon, I have a feeling it will be..."

    It is just his opinion

    From AJB:
    The trailer is good. Very moody. No action footage will disappoint some.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,392
    This guys seems to know what he's talking about. But I wonder what 'very moody' will mean. possibly a monologue? Let's hope he can give us some more clues.
  • Posts: 1,552
    How reliable is this poster? Has he/she posted any exclusives in the past that have subsequently turning out to be true?

    Could this be the same situation as the member here who claimed to have an inside knowledge and David Bowie would be singing the theme song?
  • I think im going to be disappointed with this teaser. doesn't sound good to me. Sorry, but I need some action.
  • edited March 2015 Posts: 1,552
    @Gareth007fan We don't even know how reliable this information is yet. Don't get too downhearted.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,392
    JCRendle wrote: »
    How reliable is this poster? Has he/she posted any exclusives in the past that have subsequently turning out to be true?

    Could this be the same situation as the member here who claimed to have an inside knowledge and David Bowie would be singing the theme song?

    He claimed to have seen the trailer, and gave some brief insider info on it's contents, seems pretty reliable to me.
  • edited March 2015 Posts: 3,164
    JCRendle wrote: »
    How reliable is this poster? Has he/she posted any exclusives in the past that have subsequently turning out to be true?

    Could this be the same situation as the member here who claimed to have an inside knowledge and David Bowie would be singing the theme song?

    15 March
    I've already seen the trailer and it will be positively received, but it does not contain any footage from action sequences.
    It is closer to 90 seconds in length.
    http://www.ajb007.co.uk/topic/45267/trailer/page/2/
  • he posted that coment on 15th march. I don't want to believe this at all, don't think they would not add any action in a teaser for one of the biggest blockbusters of all time.
  • Also, running time was confirmed so where does this 90 seconds come from, not believing any of this.
  • Posts: 725
    maxcraig wrote: »
    smitty wrote: »
    maxcraig wrote: »
    smitty wrote: »
    One thing to emphasize the drama end, but Mendes can be pretentious and forget who Bond's audience is. 99.9 % of the audience doesn't give a damn about Mendes' arty stuff. They want a Bond in action on a mission, not a bunch of expensive talking heads. This is coming days after IM5's trailer and if it is just talky drama, they are going to be blasted on the net with the poor comparison. It will be as the kids say, a Fail. Hope that leak from AJB was wrong.
    Rather sweeping statement considering you haven't seen the teaser yet, and based on rumour only.
    Moreover, Sam Mendes gave us Skyfall which earned $1.1 Billion at the box office, so I think the man knows what Bond is, and what the audience expects

    This site is almost nothing but comments and opinions on rumors. And I think Mendes, while competent, is very lucky. My .02 is that CR was the superior film so I'm not impressed with SF's BO. Any decent long delayed Bond filM would have likely done as well or close to it.
    I agree CR is superior.
    It's not hard, any Bond films that stay true to Fleming novels are always better than original stories.

    I agree. I would guess that EON's biggest headache when they start work on a new film is trying to get a good script. The email leaks gave us a sense of the craziness they go through trying to get a decent script done.

  • Remember, all those comments saying he has seen the trailer came last week before we knew about sony pictures tweeting the date/
  • Posts: 229
    I remember the first teaser for The Dark Knight rises has no action and barely anything from the movie except the voice of Gordon and the Batman Logo. And the audience loved it.

    Anyway it will be only a first teaser, there will be many trailers and spot Tv to come. And we are 6 months away from the release. We are lucky enough to see something
  • edited March 2015 Posts: 11,119
    smitty wrote: »
    One thing to emphasize the drama end, but Mendes can be pretentious and forget who Bond's audience is. 99.9 % of the audience doesn't give a damn about Mendes' arty stuff. They want a Bond in action on a mission, not a bunch of expensive talking heads. This is coming days after IM5's trailer and if it is just talky drama, they are going to be blasted on the net with the poor comparison. It will be as the kids say, a Fail. Hope that leak from AJB was wrong.

    That's a rather bold, and rather insane, one-sided statement you're making here. Especially since "Skyfall" brought in $1.1 Billion worldwide. Perhaps you don't give "a damn about Mendes arty pretentious stuff", which I actually find disrespectful to say, especially since Mendes is also helming SP, but I liked it. I damn liked this "pretentious shit". Like I posted in another topic:
    I think what "Skyfall" puts apart from many other Bond films, is the fact that the lack of narrative strength and lack of better explained background story, in a way, is also the strength of the film. This may sound weird, but as of today I think the absence of certain explained plot, is entirely compensated by other elements within the screenplay and because of incredible execution of that same screenplay by certain actor. The elements I am talking about:

    --> ACTING: Foremost this is IMO the biggest strength of "Skyfall". I think seeing Javier Bardem being consumed by the character Raoul Silva, makes you actually forget about plot holes. And I think this is part of the success of the film. "Skyfall" is not so much about memorable action sequences. But IT IS about memorable scenes in general. Examples: Silva's grand entrance (perhaps reminiscent of previous grand entrances of Bond villains from the 1960's), Silva's insane little William Tell game with Bond (Seeing Silva shooting down Severine is ONE of my personal highlights of the film), and Silva's conversation with "M" (until the gory moment when he puts out his prosthesis). Does it belong in a Bond film? I welcome change, and off course I think this approach can belong in a Bond-film.
    --> CHARACTERS: As I said before, screenplay writing is IMO about three things: a) Plot/Story, b) Characters and c) Dialogue. B) and C) are IMO the highlight of the "Skyfall" screenplay. Yes, some people tend to disagree with that. But movies can not be groundbreaking if one can't twist and change the technical rules of screenplay writing. I heard people saying that the "rule should be that screenplay must have a good well-explained story/plot". What counts for me is the impact of the total package; the finished film, not just one aspect like plot. Obviously "Skyfall" worked in that sense. And even set a new standard. The screenplay of "Skyfall" also hold up because of ingenious dialogue. Not so much the humor-parts, but especially the tense dramatic parts of dialogue are well-crafted. Does this approach belong in a Bond-film? Why not!
    --> DRAMA: Many "typical" Bond films found this aspect too forced, sometimes even irritating. I think this is because Bond films usually are not famed for having good drama, nor is the taste of typical Bond fans very supportive of emotional drama. And let's face it, Sam Mendes is a drama director. Still, good drama IMO is always derived from well-written characters and their backgrounds. The definition is: "It depends mostly on in-depth development of realistic characters dealing with emotional themes. It is the theme that puts the characters in conflict with themselves, others or society." Regardless of the plot, the actual motives of the characters, like those of Silva, 'M' and Bond, are entirely believable. It's not so much about "HOW" the events, leading to the motives of the characters, happened. But "Skyfall" is more about the "WHY", why the characters are acting in the film like they do. WHY is Silva so vengeful. WHY does Bond get a shut-down when his doctor refers to "Skyfall". WHY is 'M' such a mother figure to Bond.

    And I think the above approach actually could explain the insane success of "Skyfall". At least partially. Its approach --focusing on characters, acting, dialogue and memorable drama scenes, instead of such a tight, well-explained screenplay with memorable action sequences-- set a rather unique new standard that basically resulted in this insane $1.1 Billion global box office result.

    One can disagree on taste. And obviously a lot of Bond fans in here didn't like it. But I can only conclude that those people who paid some Dollars leading to that $1.1 Billion box office indirectly set a new and original standard. Apparently, they didn't miss the lack of a tight well-explained plot or memorable action sequences on first viewing. So "Skyfall" could indeed get an evergreen status in the near future. The insane amount of topics, in which "Skyfall" is discussed even more than many other Bond-films, could also be seen as another wonderful success. So please, Sam Mendes really deserves more credit for all this.

    And moreover, stop panicking like a little kid. "Mission: Impossible" is indeed full of impossible missions. But Bond is NOT Mission: Impossible. Agent 007 is working for MI-6, not IMF. 007 is NOT using fake masks, he's doing his job the old-fashioned way. I'm all in for great action sequences. But what I'm not in for is panicking before we haven't even seen the upcoming SP-teaser trailer. And even if it DOES disappoint you, then stop trying to speak for all those people who helped "Skyfall" earning $1.1 Billion worldwide, and who are about to do the same for "SPECTRE".

    And I shall be plain now. I hope the teaser trailer is, when it comes to style and tone, more reminiscent of this trailer:


    And less reminiscent of this one:
  • I knew it seemed to early for a proper teaser trailer. Wish they would wait to produce a better one if this is the case with no action. But obviously, im yet ot see it, so il just wait and then judge it.
  • Posts: 1,314
    I've not seen a mission impossible since the 2nd one. As a 'man in the street' with regards to that franchise I thought the latest trailer was rubbish. A few stunts and another quirky cameo from Simon pegg.

    No action would be fine. Mendes is bringing a level of sophistication and class. I think along with Campbell he gets bond. Christ knows how that Tamahori bloke even got a look in.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,392
    Matt007 wrote: »
    I've not seen a mission impossible since the 2nd one. As a 'man in the street' with regards to that franchise I thought the latest trailer was rubbish. A few stunts and another quirky cameo from Simon pegg.

    No action would be fine. Mendes is bringing a level of sophistication and class. I think along with Campbell he gets bond. Christ knows how that Tamahori bloke even got a look in.

    The same way lazenby did, i assume.
  • Posts: 11,119
    I knew it seemed to early for a proper teaser trailer. Wish they would wait to produce a better one if this is the case with no action. But obviously, im yet ot see it, so il just wait and then judge it.

    I think the problem in here sometimes is, that we're expecting too much, that we've become spoiled brats at times. We over-criticise things, putting soul and positivity out of the forum, whereas we are in essence talking about movies, pure entertainment, and not about real political events.

    Just think in terms of the first teaser trailer for "Star Wars". Basically no contents at all, but a wunderful chain of events resulted because of that; the best kind of viral marketing ever. Just use your imagination a bit, and enjoy.

    We'll get one hell of a Bond-film. I'm sure of it.
  • ShardlakeShardlake Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 4,043
    I've no desire to see anymore films with Tom Cruise in if I can help it and MI5 looks ridiculously OTT. I'll stick with Bond and Mendes pretentiousness.

    As for Mendes not knowing who's Bond's audience is, that is such a ridiculous statement. I'd say from the way SF was received outside of this forum that Sam did a very good job of knowing what the audience wanted from a Bond film. The fan community is a mere speck of what makes up the people who see these films.
  • Posts: 11,119
    Shardlake wrote: »
    I've no desire to see anymore films with Tom Cruise in if I can help it and MI5 looks ridiculously OTT. I'll stick with Bond and Mendes pretentiousness.

    As for Mendes not knowing who's Bond's audience is, that is such a ridiculous statement. I'd say from the way SF was received outside of this forum that Sam did a very good job of knowing what the audience wanted from a Bond film. The fan community is a mere speck of what makes up the people who see these films.

    =D> Agreed!
  • Posts: 12,462
    Personally, I actually like the idea of having a Bond film trailer with little to no action, because it opens up an opportunity for great build-up and drama. I'm looking forward to it.
  • Posts: 9,843
    ironically as I leave work at 8 the countdown is 15 minutes shy of counting down to the weekend for me.
  • would like a little bit of action though, just like the one in skyfall teaser. They was about 5 seconds of it at the end.
  • Posts: 9,843
    I want a few lines from Daniel Craig as 007I get that I am happy.
  • mcdonbbmcdonbb deep in the Heart of Texas
    Posts: 4,116
    We sure are putting a lot of stock in some guy's statement.... probably just a troll seeking attention.

    Besides studios want to make money ...they want to win at the BO. Does anybody here seriously think the studio wants a half a$$'ed teaser????

    NO!! Just wait and see before ya right off the film.

  • No, I know the film itself looks amazing for action, I know it will deliver. I just want a taste of that in the teaser, hopefully.
  • Posts: 11,119
    mcdonbb wrote: »
    We sure are putting a lot of stock in some guy's statement.... probably just a troll seeking attention.

    Besides studios want to make money ...they want to win at the BO. Does anybody here seriously think the studio wants a half a$$'ed teaser????

    NO!! Just wait and see before ya right off the film.

    Completely agree @mcdonbb

    Have you checked some forums on IMDB by the way? There's a serious feud/war going on between M:I-fans and Bond fans LOL :-P. Check the forums from "Rogue Nation" and "SPECTRE". What's next, UNCLE-fans become the mediators :-P?
Sign In or Register to comment.