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
"Or did you think it was coincidence that all of the women in your life ended up dead? Vesper Lynd for example."
An odd line to put in if they didn't want us to think that. I would say that line makes it substantially more likely, in fact. Because it's right there.
And if he didn't use surveillance and intelligence, how would he know about it?
Why are you putting those emojis in? Either we can talk in a civil manner or not. One person has already bailed on speaking to you in this conversation because of that.
In fact, on second thought, they were right: I'm not interested in speaking to you further if that's how you're going to behave and you're just intent on making this a nasty argument. Night.
Not very odd, no, not when he wants to proudly claim responsibility for Bond's misery. Odd would be expecting the audience to infer what you claim to be inferring, and then go out of your way to not demonstrate how Blofeld's decades of surveillance were put to any use whatsoever in making Bond's life miserable. Even in this very movie! I mean, Hinx has to use Mr White's security camera to track a man his organization has been extensively surveilling for decades! Odd! (Expecting us to think Blofeld used surveillance to cause Vesper to commit suicide: also extremely odd)
Uh, serious question? Because all of it involved people working for his organization. Seriously?
Because it's very, very silly?
But on a less silly note, I recently noticed that when Bond is given his room at the crater base, he looks out the window, seemingly at the same pipes he fires at later. Nice!
Also, as another touch, Bond’s room looks into the base, and Madeline’s looks outwards.
I love that the Modigliani from Skyfall is hanging in Madeline's room.
Yep, its blink and you miss it, but I appreciate the production design and set dressing went to that level of detail.
The Bond series has always had fun with paintings and hidden meanings, all the way back to Dr No.
We know why Quantum was bad, the writers strike etc. Bond 25 had Boyle leaving and drafting in Fukunaga last minute, but SP had the returning triumphant crew of the most successful bond film of all time, plus Waltz as blofeld, two awesome actresses as bond girls, bautista as a formidable henchman. Awesome locations, 300 million dollar budget, a brand new gadget laden Aston. Literally everything was in place, how did it go so wrong?
Was there a particular reason a production so set up for easy success turned into such a turkey?
https://bleedingcool.com/movies/when-blofeld-was-a-woman-in-spectre-sony-leaks/
Evidently, I disagree with nearly everything in your post, @Mendes4Lyfe. I think QOS is a pretty solid Bond film, all the more respectable because of the w.s. complications, but a nice film nonetheless. NTTD -- yes, there's a title to the film, but I'm glad you at least acknowledge that Bond 25 exists -- is a well-made film IMO. And SP is my second favourite Bond film of the Craig era.
That said, a "winning team" isn't always quality guaranteed. Take DAF. With Connery returning, the director of GF returning, and the likes of Barry, Adams, Moore, Maibaum and many more all working on this film, you'd expect an absolute delight. Well, a charming film though it is, DAF is far from perfect in my book. As the follow-up film to OHMSS, it should have been a magnificent film, even if UA wanted to make audiences forget about the one with Lazenby.
The way I see it, great ingredients do not guarantee a great film.
I too walked out of 'Spectre' very satisfied, as I am one of the few who came away from 'Skyfall' very disappointed!
I'm with you. SF is a good film, but it remains my least favourite film in the entire Craig era. SP feels much more like a Bond film to me. I have warmed up to SF, but it still doesn't beat the likes of CR, QOS or SP. Even NTTD, last time I watched both closely together, had more to offer.
Exactly my feelings! SF was well made, but it never felt like I was watching a Bond movie! I still have to watch NTTD a few more times to know where it stands in the Craig era, but there is a lot of good stuff in it, particularly in the first half!
Exactly. We jumped from 'Bond Begins' (CR, QOS) to 'Old Man Bond' (SF). Where were Craig's 'Bond In Top Form' films in between?
Also, SP didn't address the issue of a mature Bond as obviously and explicitly as SF. SP feels less of a 'Bond Past His Prime' film than the first act of SF.
If that's how the era went instead, it just might've been my shining favorite of them all. I will never be able to express my full disappointment in where the series went after QoS in 2008.
One thing I actually like about SP is seeing a Bond in his prime who seems invigorated and even humorous after going through traumatic events (SF I always see as his middle years as a 00 and SP is his peak).
I believe CR and SF will continue to stand the test of time and generally be looked at fondly by the hardcore and casual Bond fans, as they both are wonderfully self-contained and offer lots of greatness. The other three will certainly be less widely praised, with some notable detractors but also some passionate fans. Personally, I consider CR and SF top-tier films with minimal issues, and I do enjoy most of QOS and NTTD. SP, though, has been near the bottom of my rankings for a while, and I think a part of that to me is its legacy of retconning and unnecessarily forcing Craig’s films to be one continuous thing. It’s surprising I like QOS and NTTD as much as I do, I suppose, but both of them still entertained me a lot more than SP and felt closer to the seriousness Craig introduced to the franchise.
The usual loner swagger Bond brings and him doing extraordinary and inventive things, also if not all, hints of the usual Bond style and class.
That's the thing. Standalone Bond films gives room for variety and relaxes the filmmakers, knowing they don't have to think about the previous films. Craig's Bond would have easily had a new female lead in NTTD, if not for the films linking with each other. Although, even the linking would have been done wonderfully. For example, a character like Lucia not returning from SP and given more to do. Also, Blofeld not getting to show his baddie qualities more in unique ways.
Sometimes, I feel like if Craig's Bond were all standalones, he would have done more, because the writers won't have had to think too deep about the previous films before writing.
So while I love the Craig years, I will admit that there's some disgruntlement over here about how some things were handled.
Yeah. Same here. If linking must occur, it should be done properly. Craig's Bond era was an experimental era. Some elements worked, some didn't. But Craig's Bond portrayal itself, worked.
Right now, I simply can't imagine Eon doing standalone Bond films anymore, which I would have liked, though. Also, It seems like from here on out, every Bond actor would have linked films and different timelines, self-contained eras and all that. Only...they won't retcon things anymore, as they would plan ahead of time.
For me its Bond appearing past it, and washed up ( no pun intended!) and not having the usual traits we associate with him. I also took a while to get used to the new Moneypenny and Q- one was trying too hard, the other not trying had enough!!, I missed the exotic locations we usually have. (We were spoiled with QOS!) It was obvious some of the scenes here were on sets, plus the action I felt was rather ordinary and not what we expect from Bond! I was not expecting parachute jumps off cliffs from this film, but you do expect something original and exciting from Bond rather than dull shootouts at a tribunal and the silly 'Home Alone' booby trap nonsense at the finale! The pts wasn't bad, but it was at odds with the type of action we got later! I did like the final scene in Ms office, but even that came at the end rather than the beginning!
I think it's the closest to a "traditional" Bond film that the Craig era ever did and that was their intention so they were on point there.
I know people moan about the few minutes of quick editing in QOS and it's not a widely loved film (certainly not like CR), but if you take the card table out of Casino Royale, it just has little to do with James Bond, and that's what really bothers people about QOS. Making James Bond something that bears little resemblance to any past incarnation (Fleming/EON) wouldn't be sustainable over a generation of films.
(To be clear, I love QOS!)