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
I'd rather gave that than poor directing which has been the bane of the last two movies.
So you'd rather start with a bad story?
OK
Ideally we'd have good writing and good directing tho.
http://www.denofgeek.com/uk/movies/spectre/47910/spectre-the-007-film-shot-and-released-in-11-months
I am prepared to defer to Hitch and Kurosawa.
However, as P+W are on board, we can assume the script will be (at best) mediocre, so our only hope is that we get a good director on board to salvage something from the inevitable wreckage.
Interesting. This does reinforce the image of EON as slightly hapless. I'm not one for knocking them particularly, and claiming 'they don't know what they're doing', but this kind of thing just seems to so commonplace with EON. Why have they only now appointed someone to start working on the story, when time after time in recent years, it's the failure to have a decent story and script that has caused major issues.
All very strange IMO.
I also think she gave one of the best Bond Girl performances. She doesn't have the charisma of Rigg or Green but she didn't have to for this part since Madelyn is much less of a Type A personality. Her relationship with Bond and the transparent Daddy Issues going on made it really interesting.
Shambolic!
This sums up what has been going wrong in the Barbara EON years. No one is really in charge. No one is really running a tight ship. You get the impression when Cubby was around that he had final say, he called all the shots, and he was steering the ship.
Ever since GE, the scripts feel that they are done by committee. Every man and his dog has a say. Endless rewrites. In Cubby's day it was simple. It helped that Maibaum was a class above P&W anyway, but Cubby knew what he wanted. Focus on story, not on silly, contrived back stories involving Bond's past, and try to rely on Fleming as much as possible.
Now here is the big difference. Adaptation of actual Fleming scenes and characters, not trying to re-imagine Fleming, which is what has been happening under Craig's tenure, and to a lesser extent the Brosnan era too.
I feel Wilson is behind this too. He wanted to push for a family origin back story in 1986 with TLD, which Cubby rightly vetoed. Obviously now with Cubby long gone out of the picture, Wilson and co. have allowed to run riot, changing the entire history of what Fleming originally wrote. They all feel they can add their penny's worth and know exactly how Fleming would have wrote a scene - often with disastrous results!
I mentioned on one of these threads recently that upon reflection, I personally see Seydoux as easily the worst lead female in the Craig era and a complete disappointment in SP. Her character was meant to be pivotal to the narrative, and much of my displeasure with the latest film stems from my inability to buy her importance to Bond. Quite frankly, Craig acts as if he'd rather be someplace else than with her. They have absolutely zero chemistry together and moreover her part is extremely poorly written.
If I were a betting man, I would surmise that this is why we have the contrived sequences (eg. physically jumping Bond post-Hinx fight & the sudden discovery and professions of love during the torture sequence only after a few days of knowing one another). Perhaps this is also why we were delivered a sappy Bond title song more befitting Titanic - all to compensate for the evident lack of magnetism between these two on screen.
No doubt she is easy on the eyes, and perhaps that's why Cruise used her successfully in a largely non-speaking role in MI-GP. EON should have maybe done something similar.
Talk of her returning for B25 turns my stomach.
When you watch the film, the song seems to suggest some kind of epic romance to come. But it just doesn't transpire and the attempt to force it at the end is weak as hell.
An entire sequence planned for 10 days' filming at Cusco, Peru, was dropped for budget and scheduling difficulties.
I still believe in 15-20 more years QOS will get an OHMSS type of appreciation & cult following. It mimicked Bourne but was still ahead of its time.
That setting looks incredible. Shame it didn't feature. Would have made a stellar film even more stellar. I wonder, though, as that's a mountainous setting, if the sequence wasn't intended as part of the aerial dogfight—or even just an alternate setting for the same sequence.
That would be great, and deserved.
A bit crude, but certainly true of every Bourne film I've seen, which is the first three.
You mean reassessed. "Reaccessing" is what Bond was doing with both Goodhead and the Earth at the conclusion of Moonraker.
I also think QOS works well partly because of its shorter running time.
As observed above, Craig's other three are overlong IMO. CR just about justifies it, although I think drags in places, while SF and SP just feel flabby and poorly conceived/edited.
I think Greene is a very under-rated villain,and one of my favourites.
I didn't say it didn't have light and shade, my problem is that it doesn't have enough. It's a film that's eager to get from A to B as quickly as possible, which would be fine if the plot in someway necessitated that, but it doesn't.
Post production on Spectre was very short. Mendes was still editing the weekend before the premiere.