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
There's always risk when you chose film roles.
I don't think it was a bad career move. If Cavill never gets to play Bond he can say he got to play a similar sort of spy.
Cavill has Superman as a back-up. Brandon Routh (remember him!) didn't have a film career after Superman Returns. He's gone back to tv. I think Henry Cavill has a much more secure career because of Superman. And as you say, if UNCLE were a hit and a franchise he'd never be Bond so in a weird way if it flops it might improve his chances of playing Bond. How bizarre is that. :D
Jon Hamm should have been Solo, but I can say that Hamm should have gotten any number of roles in the last decade. REALLY not understanding why this multi-talented guy is missing out on so much, unless he poaches wildlife illegally in his spare hours.
I think his dating video holds back his career.
Fabulousity! ;))
Here's The Spy Command's review. While it's favorable, the movie definitely is an alternate universe.
https://hmssweblog.wordpress.com/2015/08/13/review-guy-ritchie-adds-an-edge-to-u-n-c-l-e/
I also liked Pemberton's score, some little touches of Barry...
And some trvia fact: The two German actors Sylvester Grothe and Christian Berkel both were in INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS, as did Christoph Waltz. :bz
And there was a SPECTRE trailer before the man film, but it was *only* the teaser trailer... [-O<
How do you know that? I think the acronym "U.N.C.L.E." was neatly explained in the end titles sequence. A bit like how Bond got his 00-licence after he killed two men during the PTS and how "0.0.7." got stamped in the main titles sequence of "Casino Royale". In fact, very similar examples really.
The only difference is: "The Man From U.N.C.L.E." is a brand nobody knows off today, whereas Bond is a pop-cultural icon that all Earthlings know off. That fact alone gave Warner a much harder task with their origins story as opposed to EON's/Sony's/MGM's agent James Bond 007.
Also, "U.N.C.L.E." is a TV-Series that didn't age as well as "Mission: Impossible". Although "U.N.C.L.E." did won a Golden Globe, I find the TV-series much harder to watch as of today. Perhaps because it's more camp-y, cheesy than "Mission: Impossible"? And the fact that the film is really a period-piece doesn't help the target audience to expand. If you really want to make the 60's iconic again, you had to do like Austin Powers did. And luckily Guy Ritchie prevented that.
I have tried to fully place myself in the 1960's. How would I react to this movie if I was really living in 1963? And suddenly, you'll discover that this film could have been a real competitor to "Goldfinger" or "From Russia With Love"......back in 1963. But not in 2015.
Tomorrow I will post a review. But in all honesty? I hope Warner doesn't give up on this franchise. It really took courage to create this nice combo of a reboot and revival by dusting off "U.N.C.L.E.". If I were Warner, I would look at the potential they have with this franchise from now on...
Sadly, we know how short-sighted the world has become since 1963 :-).
The producer on MAD MEN also wouldn't adjust the shooting schedule for outside work. Hamm had the Affleck lead role in GONE GIRL, but then had to bow out because Weiner wouldn't work with Fincher on adjusting the dates.
I'm actually pretty cool with just getting 'Draper with a gun.'
Having seen it for a second time, it's pretty clear, that U.N.C.L.E., at the end of the film, consists of Waverly and the three agents (his comment about keeping the team together).
U.N.C.L.E. in the show consisted of five regional headquarters and many, many field offices as well as a training complex hundreds of miles off the main shipping lines.
It would take some time, not to mention lots of investment, to get a worldwide organization up and running.
http://thequietus.com/articles/18532-man-from-u-n-c-l-e-review
Sigh
I won't spoiler anything, let's just say it looks fantastic, very stylish, the music is great if not genius, I like the cast, it is funny.
But somehow it was a bit boring really. The story is kind of ok but nothing really special.
The characters could have been done better.
Honestly, not a movie that has to be seen at the cinema. If you like Spy movies then buy the DVD/Blu-ray/Download when it's out.
Guy Ritchie is not the best of directors. Sometimes he has a moment of glory but UNCLE isn't one of them.
Anyway If I had to rate UNCLE I'd give it 7.0 of which 1.0 is merely for the looks and sound of the movie.
The re-watchability of UNCLE is hard to predict, I have to wait till it hits the home cinema.
You've seen the film?
I'm referring to the notion that it took 'courage' for WB to produce the film. I don't need to see it to know that is claptrap.
Ok
Yeah, I wrote that review. I'd say both films are very stylish, slick spy movies with the tongue firmly planted in the cheek. Not strong on plot, but Kingsman has the edge based on it being better with the irony. Haven't seen Mi5 yet.
Let's hope the rest of the world will be able to bring this movie to around 100m+ overall (what's the budget for this movie btw?)
So she can be sure no one will know about Cavil before he plays Bond hehe.
But its just a crazy idea don't listen to me much