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
Yes, I loved Ghostbusters as a kid, but there's never been any good argument for it being a film series (the cartoon I'll give a pass as I loved it!) and every instalment after 1984 has been worse and worse. But no.2 was at least a sequel to the first and tried to be of a kind with the first; Afterlife was fan service done very poorly in my opinion. In the original there's a nice joke about Egon collecting spores, mould and fungi; Afterlife seemed to think that showing us that collection made it funnier or something.
Yes, I find the diabolization of fan service to be diabolical, really. It works when they know their fans and fandom. When they feel they do and don’t, things go awry. And when they work against the fans it really shows and it creates ripples that go beyond the franchise and into political and economical treads.
All and all, when they know their fans, fan service os wonderful. If they think fan service is past film referencing and homages, for example, it just doesn’t work as well.
The only franchise/film I can currently think of that's 'reinvented' its character (so that's not a sequel or part of an existing superhero 'universe') while still maintaining a deference/understanding of the source material (and indeed subtle 'fan service') is probably The Batman, as much as I know not everyone loves that film.
I am a big fan of ST: Next Generation; Picard season 3 was incredible. It was an outstanding send off for that crew.
The criticisms I've heard about Picard were broadly that it felt too bleak, and that a lot of the decisions weren't in line with the spirit of the original shows. Again, very much second hand stuff that I can't say anything about one way or the other, and I'm sure plenty have said the same about stuff I've liked and wouldn't agree with (including The Batman probably).
I agree again with @talos7 …. I thought season one was … fine. I’m a sentimentalist, so
I enjoyed seeing Picard, Data, Riker and Troi…. That was enough for me to tune into every episode. But I was underwhelmed …
Season 2 was a hot mess. A steaming pile of hot mess…
Season 3 was as perfect as I could have hoped and washed the other two seasons away… it was the first trek series, probably since TNG, where I was excited to watch each new episode. The entire team, from those in front of the camera, to those behind it, killed it. And, at least for this audience member, left me wanting more— which should always be the goal…
I didn't say there was, but what I did say was that the fan service in Ghostbusters was poorly done. And you can certainly have too much of it.
Yes it was tremendous, very exciting stuff. I would say that it fell away slightly towards the end when everything that you expected to happen started happening, and it perhaps felt slightly empty fan wish fulfilment at that point as a result (and let's not mention the post-credits scene), but it was still way more engaging than a dozen of those Star Wars series which cost ten times as much.
And that is a valid opinion, even if I don’t agree. .
I think the most cringey was the return of that punk rocker from THE VOYAGE HOME. That bit felt overwritten.
If 9-11 was in part a catalyst for a darker, more serious take on the character, than where are we now, in world rapidly escalating to a new Cold War full of proxies and the very real possibilities of direct conflict between the West and a loose alliance coalescing around China, Russia, Iran and North Korea?
Does a new Bond reflect that or maybe just ignore it?
Throw in the climate crisis, growing wealth disparity, inflation, etc. and the very real possibility of a crypto fascist becoming American president again ... and, well, you know, I don't see a reincarnation of Roger Moore stepping forward anytime soon.
I’d like a spy thriller. Cloak and dagger stuff, with well written characters.
It doesn’t have to be globetrotting or even overly action packed. Use Fleming as much as possible.
Updating his novels for a modern time could be an idea.
Sometimes the spectacle is sufficient, as it remains for me with TSWLM and MR, but that's probably a result of nostalgia in first seeing these as a child.
Who is Bond after Craig, that's the difficult part. And how will we fans see him in relation to his antecedents? I don't think there's a default Bond that the series can just go back to. The Craig years may have been inconsistent, but anodyne in his representation he wasn't.
I almost don't care about the iteration so long as a sharply-delineated character comes first, necessarily supported by a decent script ...
Yep that sounds great for Bond 26. Sign me up
where is the controversy? You are adapting novels and you're not the only one.
It's very common. Why EON can't do that?
How much action is there in Skyfall though? Once you’re past the credits, what.. a fight in the skyscraper, a fight in the casino, a quick gunfight at the inquiry… and then you’re at the climax: it’s not exactly packed. Do you want less action than that?
The only exceptions would probably be Thunderball (even though the film plays on the fear of nuclear armageddon that has been top of mind since the Cuban Missile Crisis), OHMSS, DAF, LALD and Moonraker, the latter two reflecting the cinematic landscape more than the politics of that time. In any case, it is very rare that these films are made without reflecting the world in which they are produced (politically and culturally). In fact, it would be practically unprecedented for the series if Bond 26 did not reflect the world of the second half of the 2020s.
The worst was the TND/TWINE/DAD trifecta by Vic Armstrong that seemed to be way over-reliant on machine gun action. So it was a breath of fresh air when CR scaled down the action, though I suppose that’s a consequence of adapting a book that’s centered on a card game.
I remember being worried when QOS was in production and it was apparent they were doubling on the amount of set pieces. And it turned out to have some of the worst action set pieces of the franchise. I think the only way one could actually enjoy the set pieces is if they’re accustomed to the shakycam and over-editing where camera shots only last a few frames.
It’s absolutely insane to me how CR was done so well that Eon decided not to try replicating that success and keep that second unit, but instead allow Marc Forster to take Bourne’s second unit/editing team and just make a poor imitation of what Paul Greengrass was more adept at.
When news broke that SF was bringing back Alexander Witt and Stuart Baird, it was music to my ears.
But that's not what you were saying @DEKE_RIVERS , 😂. And that is not NOT what I was saying.
But you know that.
Look at what you did say: "with a novel you don't need a "twist". The book will give you enough stuff". This statement is a very incorrect statement, just like when you said screenplays aren't written to be read.
But instead of cluttering up this thread with this silliness, I invited you to reach out for a private discussion.
Which it was obvious from the jump that you wouldn't.
Saying that, my DM is still open.
yes, that's what I say. Adapting novels is useful. don't you think so?
Ha! That is funny. And I don't know how fair it is to call it the Bourne team anyway: Dan Bradley had just come off Indiana Jones- he wasn't just Bourne. He also went on to do the same job on Mission Impossible Ghost Protocol; and that wasn't Bourne either.
Does anyone know how the QoS car chase was intended to end, incidentally? Seeing that footage of the Aston flipping onto its side again last week put it in my mind and I'm still eager to know what we missed. I think it must hit the spinning rear tyre of the JCB it and the Alfa are passing either side of, which flips it on its side, but I'm not sure why.