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 will buy the series on DVD just to spite the film-makers in their dis of this iconic theme.
Dorks.
Kingsman wasn't a spoof, it wasn't a comedy and it didn't take the piss. It was a homage. Personally I don't think UNCLE looks as good. Kingsman was a breath of fresh air. Refreshingly violent inventive and OTT, a refreshingly different protagonist, and solid inspirational themes (I was surprised at how many criticized it for being a right wing film, I didn't interpret it that way at all) backing up the fun colourful, Roger Moore esque plot. Kingsman took the classic Bond tropes and had fun pushing them to their extremes. UNCLE will be more of a standard action film (since it'll be 12a/pg 13), and it just has the classic Bond tropes but doesn't do anything with them, more of a generic spy movie. Fun but not as fresh as Kingsman, imo.
UNCLE will likely do better box office (lower age rating, summer release date, and just a more easily marketable film) but will it be as well received as Kingsman was? I'm not so sure.
The audience obviously doesn't want to see that kind of movie anymore. I think the Nolan-esque style (that Skyfall and maybe Spectre copies) has actually gotten out of style now.
Uh-huh. From four people. (One of which is a three star review declaring it has a "so-so storyline", so I'm not sure how that math adds up). Mission Impossible is at 4 and a half stars after 4,120 ratings.
But that's like saying SP will fail if Newman doesn't use the iconic Bond theme. I think there is something more that's causing this film to possible not do well. Maybe the stars are really not registering with the general audience, or maybe the younger audience doesn't know or care much about the TV show. If it's in trouble, it's more than the theme music.
But it seems like neither.
[-(
http://www.manfromunclegame.com/
Regardless, Ritchie wanted to capture the "Tone" of UNCLE but at the same time start from scratch to give themselves the creative leeway to make it their own instead of an imitation of the series. That includes the theme, which is great but unrecognizable to most people. They tried putting it in the film and then in the end credits but it just didn't fit with the new feel of the film so they opted to cameo it in the middle of the film. At least they did that. Also "How to Steal The World" which was one of the original UNCLE movies did not have the Goldsmith theme in it at all. Even the original guys opted not to use the theme in one of their own movies. The first Star Trek films didn't feature the TV theme either.
Speaking of the music, the score by Pemberton, while not copying the old series gives it a nod with a heavy dose of bongos and harpsichord.
Ah Kingsman was more like a Flint film than Bond, in it's style and content. Those are two very different kinds of films. Bond is Bond and Flint is a humorous riff on Bond but does not have a solid unique identity at it's core.
To long term fans it's a must.
New viewers would find it as amazing as we ever did (Goldsmith was a musical genius).
meh
Well the influence is that all of these movies were greenlit after Skyfall. There will always be occasional Bond wannabes showing up, but suddenly getting four spy films in one year? Every studio in town looked at those Skyfall numbers and immediately dusted off whatever spy property they had lying around, probably reasoning that if we can get just a third of what that Bond movie did, then we've got a hit. So we get Spy, Kingsman, and UNCLE all put into production and releasing at more or less the same time, as well as Grimsby delayed to next year (a 5th Mission Impossible was probably going to happen regardless, but Skyfall may have nudged Paramount and Cruise into striking while the iron was hot).
Bet you are dead right.
You're right. And even Spielberg wasn't immune to this Bond spy craze influence. He fairly recently changed the title of his film to Bridge of Spys using Spys in the title (which wasn't there before) and is opening it just before SP. He also hired Newman to write the score. Spielberg, no fool, also cut the trailer to look like an action film, which it isn't. Unless the film gets great reviews, I kind of think the general audience will hold off 2 weeks for SP.
There are probably a dozen other spy films that have opened this year we could comb through that are also a product of the studio rush to cash in on the SF spy dollars. It's not that they are putting out tons of spy films, it's that they are all copying Bond to a greater or lesser degree which makes it very hard for Bond, coming at the end of the year, to look original and fresh. I still think that MI5 was shifted cleverly to July to avoid looking redundant to SP, now it could look as if Bond is redundant to MI5, which is kind of weird since it really means SP is copying MI5 which is really copying Bond. Many reviews noted MI5's similarities to Bond.
That's not entirely true. Early tracking for "Rogue Nation" was very disappointing, with an opening weekend of $ 40 Million. Final figures were $ 15 Million more: $ 55 Million opening weekend total.
Going back to the music score, I've always thought that when making a movie taken from a popular TV show it's always better to bring existing fans along with you and to any real fan, the UNCLE theme is instantly recognisable and a vital part of the ethos as is the Uncle Special which does seem to have made into the movie at least in some form.
Ah sorry @Smitty ;-). Thanks for the clarification.
Let's see. I am also curious why no journalists or editors asking Tom Cruise "When are you going to quit your role as secret agent Ethan Hunt-IMF?" Daniel Craig receives this question constantly, and he only did four films so far. It's more valid to scrutinize the "M:I"-franchise now instead of the 53-year old Bond franchise. Will someone else step into the titular character role of Ethan Hunt? Or will Hunt die, and Renner becomes the new lead as Brand? Moreover, the "M:I"-franchise works thanks to Cruise's role, but he's a producer too. So how does he see the future of "Mission: Impossible"? Will he try to avoid a post-Connery-backlash that the early Bond films had?