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
Link?
Yay!!!! Yea I wanted his approval almost as if I made the movie myself lol.
The audio will be up soon. He really rates it. Described the plot as 'ludicrous', but so much fun you roll with it. Said it hit him 2/3 of the way through that it was great.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b06k9wgp
It was a live show and it just finished, a link should be showing up soon here http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00lvdrj
He was hugely, and I mean hugely enthusiastic about it. He was constantly saying how much fun he had and how he could feel the audience on Wednesday was feeling the same way and laughing at the jokes, at how praising the cast performances, etc. They were joking about the characters wardrobe and something funny about Oberhauser's, particularly (under spoiler just in case)
Thank God they praise the movie
;)
The future success on the next actor, is dependant on who that actor is. Because Daniel Craig bought in to this. He has made sure his voice was heard and had input on everything from Script, to clothes, to the cars and the casting. He has used his status to draw in Oscar winning actors and directors.
Your right Craig was allowed a blank canvas. The next will not be giving the same, the films are successful and it has to be about continuity on this new timeline.
The next Bond would need to deliver the same, for any actor it is a it a red herring.
I used to say Connery 1st then Craig. But now I can't separate them, they are the golden age Bonds and for the very reason they were the first of their kinds.
On the evidence to date (pre-SP) I don't personally feel that DC is up to the same level as SC. Not by a long shot.
He was given an 'actor's role in an actor's film' in CR. He delivered, magnificently, because that is what he should have done. That is what he was hired for. There was enough meat on that bone for him to delve into.
However, if one subtracts that one film and performance, I don't feel that he has been as good a Bond as Connery, or even Moore (that is, just counting his performances in QoS & SF).
SP will be the real test for me to determine if he can play Bond convincingly in a 'pure Bond film'.
I don't think they will have a problem replacing him if he decides to move on, especially if they are going to a more formulaic approach, which is possible. There are several good actors out there who can take this franchise forward. As long as they don't pander to the 'in thing' or 'flavour of the year' as they did with the title song artist, we should be good.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b06j0c5q
Great review!! I can't be more excited for this movie!!
If this is true, I'm a very, very happy man.
However I get a feeling the score should be higher because there are some pretty pathetic reviews that get listed and get scored with a green splat when they actually give the film 3 stars. This "review" is just terrible. Nothing interesting at all given in the review. Yet it gets put onto rottentomatoes. Its these kind of reviews that in the end will bring the score down when in reality the score would be much higher if only the scores of established film critics were counted.
i give this review * out of *****
http://www.theskinny.co.uk/film/new-releases/spectre-daniel-craig
All reviews should be accepted. To bash one or the other review because you don't agree is kind of wrong.
Only to count reviews of "established" critics, whatever that means, is short of censuring opinions.
Metascore is 69% and average critic rating on RT is 7.0 at the moment.
People should learn to accept the reality that obviously not all critics praise Spectre.
Furthermore those scores can very well go up once enough reviews are counted.
But a lot are. It's kinda like is the glass half full or half empty?
Same glass just different perspectives.
I think....I think.......I THINKKK.......most of us haven't seen the bloody movie yet. That's what I think. We should not just blindly 'accept' stuff. But we can respect people's reviews.
But I do think at this stage we are all so deep into defending our own arguments, our own posts. That's because we all love James Bond 007.
And again @BondJasonBond006. Indeed, many people, including me, are accepting the current reviews. I mean, what can you do about it :-). I think you're making quite a few assumptions when you say that most people....most fans aren't 'accepting' the current reviews.
Look, I'm a person that adapts way easily to unexpected situations -or situations that one did see coming- than some others think :-). Look, I see it like this: 7.0 average critics rating means a dead certain "Certified Fresh" stamp from RottenTomatoes. Isn't that wonderful :-D!.
Also, look on the positive side. Try to swallow disappointments way sooner, more faster. It's what I've learnt in my life.
@NobodyDoesItBetter: Obviously RottenTomatoes is what it is. Some 'above average' reviews are counted as 'Trash', and other 'bad' reviews are included into the list of 'Fresh' reviews. And at this stage....still anything can happen. The reviews from the USA aren't in just yet. So be patient.
For me personally I don't mind so much. There are bad reviews, and very good reviews. One thing I did underestimate though, was the aspect of "Sequel Backlash". "Skyfall" was a phenomenon. Just like "The Dark Knight" back in 2008, and "Furious 7" earlier this year.
So many Bond fans in here should have embraced that fact a bit more sooner....and fiercer. "Skyfall" IS a phenomenon, like "From Russia With Love", "Goldfinger", "The Spy Who Loved Me", "GoldenEye" and "Casino Royale". And once that happens, reviewing goes into a different mode. The sequel gets way more heavily scrutinized....and gets especially heavily compared with its immediate predecessor. Reviewers are getting a bit 'confused' and 'silly', and suddenly want to have some kind of "Skyfall 2.0" (which is ludicrous), or they suddenly praise the more Bond-esque elements again. It's the legacy of "Skyfall" perhaps.
I do think that's part of the reason why "SPECTRE" gets reviewed like it is right now. Perhaps because in part it's not that much because "SPECTRE" is bad or not that good, but more because "Skyfall" was so good...so praised back in 2012.
By the way, I do think now that because of all this...."SPECTRE" will be another insane box office success.
You are twisting my words and adding to them things I never said.
"Most people" "Most fans"....sorry GG but you do show signs of fanboyism too every now and then. It's quite annoying how some people react to numbers and scores when they don't suit their view of things. [-(
Well I'm back when Spectre has run its course. See ya.
Well, let me put it like this. I'm still happy :-). Beforehand I thought "SPECTRE" could easily do a 93% score on RT. Now that won't be the case, I accept it and go on no? You see it in my posts. I adjust my figures, scale them down. But I accept it. I'm not going to bicker about it.
I love Skyfall but repeating the same thing again would have been lazy, hearing the words ludicrous to describe Bond is the way it should be. Bond is ludicrous in all the right ways, it's pure fantasy.
Yeah! This is exciting for me! :))
I think...what he basically says is this: "SPECTRE" is a masterpiece, but a very different masterpiece as compared to "Skyfall" and "Casino Royale". It's more of a masterpiece when taking into account the Bond-formula. Whereas "Casino Royale" and "Skyfall" were masterpieces outside that typical Bond formula.
And on the whole, what "SPECTRE" does right is that it doesn't copy "Skyfall". I see many topics in here saying "it isn't as good as "Skyfall" ". But what's the fuzz about that if you do get a different film than "Skyfall" now?
Another review, sorry but l can't remember which one, said that SP was Craig's TB/YOLT!