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
Thanks for this. It’s great see such a beautifully written enthusiasm review. It’s certainly helped bolstered my hype levels
Absolutely. And at least for me, when it comes to franchise films with low critical prestige, I get a little worried if the critics like it too much. I mean, if a critic thinks Thunderball and Octopussy are moderately entertaining schlock (or worse), but then they love the current film, that might indicate that I'm getting a movie very different to what I'd want. Like perhaps a more cynical or meta take.
Longevity is everything with these movies. I can't imagine tapping out a review at midnight Wednesday. That being said, I loved your piece, @StirredNotShaken!
Yeah, and even though I love them, I don't think we've yet had a really perfect Bond movie yet- along the lines of something like Raiders, which I would say is a perfectly-hewn movie in this sort of genre.
The closest in terms of purity and everything just working on almost every level would probably be Goldfinger; I might actually put Skyfall up there quite close although I know many would disagree- maybe Spy Who Loved Me comes close as well.
Personally, I think there's a reason why CR is still considered Craig's best Bond movie to date, and that's because it incorporated a lot of Fleming whilst injecting something new at the same time. Getting the rights to CR was a stroke of good fortune after DAD, but where to go after NTTD and the self-contained, mini-universe of Craig's Bond?
But in Raiders the plot is pertinent to Indy’s character development. At the end of the movie he’s not the same relic stealing neo imperialist that he is at the start. Not sure what Bond learns in GF? If anything he’s even more of a (magnificent) b******d in Thunderball….
It does, although I think they're wrong because Indy clearly steers the course of the film! :) Bond probably only really does one really instrumental thing, which is the 'turning' of Pussy- so more by accident than any grand plan (and then killing Oddjob, although I expect the troops would have just machine gunned him! :) ).
It was also based on Spielberg's desire to make a Bond film though, and they do both satisfy the same requirements in an audience, even if the superficial trappings are different. Bond films aren't spy films, they're adventure movies.
I wouldn't be one of those: I probably prefer the Bond series overall but I think each of those first three Indy movies is better and more cohesively-made than any one Bond movie. I would certainly say they're better-directed, maybe until you get to Mendes.
I think CR is superbly thrilling and compelling, and yet somehow still feels a bit scrappy in places, a bit thrown-together, if that makes sense? A couple of the action scenes feel a bit bolted-on, some of the character motivations are muddied etc. Skyfall feels more of a complete, authored film to me with a smooth arc running through it, even if some of the plot doesn't quite hang together when you think about it too much. It's also got more style and polish, and that's a big part of the appeal of Bond I'd say.
I think you're definitely right there: a Bond movie is pretty much whatever film they watch with Bond in it. Whereas we Bond fans get upset if the lead actor's hair is the wrong colour or they let a mad Frenchman do the music :)
Her review was actually quite positive.
That’s nice, I still dislike her as a critic.
https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/movies/story/2021-09-29/no-time-to-die-bond-review-daniel-craig
Matt Helm films came from the books, which were quite different - gritty, serious, with many non-exotic locales. I think the films were much more entertaining in terms of cinematic experiences. But I could even see putting out Matt Helm films - maybe direct to streaming for them and Flint - alternating between serious and gritty Helm, with wild and crazy Helm. Maybe even two different Helm actors, or not !
https://variety.com/2021/film/asia/no-time-to-die-box-office-opening-korea-1235077580/
This began a 12 hour deep dive into just how wrong that student was, I hope.
That's a fun idea! :)
I tried to watch a Helm recently: there was a scene where his Q equivalent gave him a jacket with explosive buttons- he tossed a button and it exploded, then they discussed it. And to end the scene, they just tossed a button again- same thing happened, it exploded. And that to me showed what was wrong with the film: there was no pace to it at all- you'd already seen one explode, you didn't need to see it again. It just shows how tight the Bond movies are (maybe apart from Thunderball, but I guess you can't swim fast!).
Don’t let it. I’ve watched plenty of positive reviews. Being Stateside, I won’t see it until next Wednesday but general audience seem to really like it. NTTD seems ambitious in scope and scale. There will be people who don’t like it, of course, but this movie sounds like it packs a punch.
I'm Wednesday as well. Can't wait!
That title lends itself to a porn spoof pun title very easily. Change the "O" to another vowel, change 117 by subtracting 48 and, badabing, badaboom, a new movie...
Wow I never thought of that :))
I was actually quite surprised when I discovered OSS 117 first appeared in a 1949 novel, predating CR with four years.