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
GF was most definitely not 'just another Bondfilm' upon its release. People went gaga for it. And EoN cashed in on that buzz with the follow up – they would never have thrown such a budget at TB if GF had not had the impact it did.
Same situation with Spectre now -> if SF had not had the impact it did, no SP (at least not in the form & scale we are getting it now). None. Nada.
I dont know why but I'm just not getting a GF vibe. Maybe that has more to do with an already overcrowded Marvel/DC marketplace that better suits the younger moviegoer than a 50 year old franchise that's no longer kid-friendly? I'm also not sure if I was a kid again, and had just come out of a SF showing, that I would want to be James Bond the same way I did when I first saw Sean Connery strutting his stuff, not unless I was a dour, miserable kid that is.
I was too young for GF, and only became aware of 007 when YOLT came out in 67, though my parents wouldn't take me to see it and so had to wait for OHMSS. But I can recall all the toys and spy TV shows durring the 60's.
I think people will go see the new Bond movie like they've pretty much always done, especially now that EON have moved the summer opening slot back to autumn after LTK fared less well, and will pay considerably more for their cinema ticket than they did before and everything will look rosey once more. Job done. Roll on Bond 25...
I don't think @AceHole is implying it's reminiscent of Bondmania, it clearly isn't anything like that period of time in that regard, I think it's more a comparison with the big numbers both films did and the subsequent knock on effect, creatively and with reference to the production scale, which is reminiscent of the GF to TB transition.
Yes, SP is going to make a bucketful of cash and cement DC as a very popular 007 for the 21st Century.
truthfully - i dont think the films were ever meant to be "kid friendly" - i just think things that might not have been seen as morally acceptable back then, are pretty commonplace now... not saying Bond films weren't morally acceptable - but the films back in those days more-or-less were received the same way that a PG-13 movie is now ((for example, Psycho when it was released was considered one of the scariest films made - but by today's standards, it's pretty tame.. my little nieces who are barely 10 years old watch it with me and don't get scared.))... and, not to mention that when Roger Moore took over, it made it a little easier for children to watch, as he played things lighter than Sean did...
Well crikey, old boy, thanks for your very courteous apology :>
None needed however, as I always have my giant salt-pincher at the ready when I discuss issues on here..!
And yes, I was mainly referring to the similarities in lieu of the impact the success of SF has had in shaping SP, the 'knock-on effect' as RC7 puts it's - but I was also making a very slight comparison to the Bondmania of the mid-60's, though I see your point that the public response is nowhere near as colossal.
That's ok, mate. We're all adults here and I do like to discuss all things Bond with like-minded intelligent people. Sorry, if I came across as an arse. You do make some very good points.
i will say this though, this current run that Craig is on, is about as close to a 2nd golden age of Bond films as we've seen since probably the 60s... not just in terms of financial success but also critical and general public reception.
As I said - nothing to apologize about here, I'd far rather have a discussion with people who speak their mind and have a true opinion (however different from my own) than get bland agreement or fence-sitting.
Agreed.
Whilst interest from Bond aficionado's has always been high - the attention given to 007 by the mainstream media & movie-going public has not been this high since the mid 60's.
Excellent points, @Haserot. Indeed, the BO numbers can tell us the story. What's interesting, as we look at these JAMES BOND BO NUMBERS, is that TB topped GF. This I didn't know. I won't argue GF's popularity....but there was a rising tide, wasn't there? DN to FRWL to GF to TB. The increase in BO numbers was exponential. And then they fell off a bit with YOLT. That was the first of the films to include a two-year gap. Hmmm.
As for the "just another Bond film." I still wonder, though, despite the BO numbers, if people were aware that they were witnessing a phenomenon. That's all I'm saying. I'll have to read more on it.
it's hard to say.. if i had to wager a guess, i would say yes - just because of the levels of mania that would go on at premieres and other public events.. it's hard to look at it and not recognize the phenomenon while it's happening... just like The Beatles.. and even the movies like 'Jaws' and 'Star Wars'
Night club performers asking for a special showing at 2.30 am, come on, that was not just another movie :)
Also there are French interview of Connery explaining Bondmania is going too far, talking about the merchandising etc.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/william-bradley/mad-about-the-60s--goldfinger-at-50-and-beyond_b_6410468.html
What do people think now?
One of my least favorite entries compounded by the fact it led to yet another long gap, in which fans are subjected to countless articles advocating a gender, ethnic change or overall makeover for the series post Craig.
Sony's partnership expired (with Tom "Deadpool would never work as a movie" Rothman replacing Amy Pascal) and so EON spent a hell of a long time trying to find a new one for MGM. I'm sure if things aligned better that we would have had a release coming out this year instead of the next. Wilson had hoped a new deal with a distributor would be struck by early 2016.
Yep! Still ranked last for me.
Meanwhile, both GOLDFINGER and SKYFALL are in my top 3. So if there's a pattern, it's that Connery and Craig's #4s are not exactly reaching the heights of their #3s.
Moore is in his own league though, as I thought MOONRAKER was his best film up to that point.
Good points. I do feel, though, that SP exhausted the Bond team to the point they needed some time off. Then another year for Craig to decide whether he was coming back or not. In the meantime Michael and Barbara had the MGM deal to sort out as well.
At long last the ball is beginning to roll on B25.
Not as famous or acclaimed as it's predecessor.
Disenfranchised star in Craig, Similar to Connery.
Blofeld and hollowed out volcanoes.
While I don't mind it as much as some, once the new Bond film nostalgia wore off, the flaws were definitely there. I really have no reason to revisit it at any point soon. I caught it on cable about two months ago and one viewing left me pissed and about a week or so later I somewhat enjoyed it. It's a bipolar Bond film for me.
I really hope B25 will be better.