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
Agreed, I feel like it just doesn't work in 2020.
But have you not noticed how they find lots of ways for Bond to be out of constant communication with MI6 in these films?
That should be established in the beginning of the adventure, and apart from the ocasional useful report, Bond should be left to his own devices. But I guess that would simply rely too much on the writer's imagination.
I love CR, but the overuse of handhelds is annoying as hell. Not to mention they all put a very ugly timestamp on the film. Not the kind a DBS from 2006 puts, mind you, but the sort of overused reference that is clearly there just to move along the narrative. Plain poor writing.
Yes, Bond is now in the 21st century, but the best thing about Bond is his character, which is timeless, and referencial to an old school of thought that harkens back to the Empire days. And before you say it, no, I'm not saying he is imperialistic. But the romantic notions of it, such as the sun rising and setting over the empire and so on, are pretty much there in Fleming's novels. St. George vs the Dragon, Bond as an example of British fortitude, a relic, an old dog, are all brilliant ways to describe the character (almost all from the Craig films, btw). Sure, Mi6 gives him earphones, but he dips them in champagne and throws them aback with swagger. That's the "Bondian" way. There's another fan made word for ya ;)
And an interesting point: as the world relies in electronics and communications so much these days, wouldn't be intelligent for 00s to use analog, mechanical, untraceable stuff? A lighter that is a gun, a tie as a garrote, ... Have the analysts do their thing, give Bond their intel and then instruct him to go in alone, and not have him go rogue by allergenic process to the service every single time.
By that logic if you don't like something in a Bond film you should also leave this forum as it's for fans of Bond films.
It's quite possible, you see, to strongly dislike one aspect of something whilst not disliking every example of it. So you're guilty a logical fallacy there I'm afraid.
SP also started with Bond completely without backup, featured him going to Rome again completely on his own (yes he phones Moneypenny for some help with some filling), then Austria completely on his own. Q turns up, gives him some technical help with. a clue (as he gets help from Q in many films- FYEO springs to mind). From there he goes to Tangier and doesn't need to be in touch with MI6, then travels to Blofeld's crater at which point in the film we see M deciding that he must be completely on his own. After he deals with Blofeld completely on his own he returns to London and meets with MI6 (much like at this point in the film he does so in OHMSS, for example) and they agree on a plan to end the problem. He is then captured and taken to the derelict MI6 building where he has to escape completely on his own. From there he and Madeline take down Blofeld. M and the police turn up after he has taken down Blofeld completely on his own.
Compare that to something like From Russia With Love where he spends most of his mission with the MI6 chief in Turkey and sends constant communication back to London to keep them abreast of his progress, including recordings of his conversations. And after that he's helped by other officers from Station I and arranges to meet another MI6 agent on the train home.
I find this talk of formula extremely tiresome. I can't think of a Bond film which chucks out the sacred 'formula' more than something like Live and Let Die or OHMSS, but fans who go on about it don't seem to be able to see that. Old = good and New = bad.
And that's what you see in pretty much all of Craig's films. Yes, he's able to use a phone when he needs to, what is the problem exactly?
Well at least you're consistent then.
'Tiresome' does not equal 'incessant'. What is tiresome and what isn't is rather subjective, I'm afraid. I, and others, find the 'Scooby Gang' complaint tiresome.
I find it bizarre that anyone would watch these and find no respect for the past in them.
What was the first Bond where he wore an earpiece? Living Daylights? They put a phone in his Bentley in the second film and he carried a pager. He's got a homing device in his shoe in Goldfinger and swallows a tracking device in Thunderball.
Is the main complaint that he uses modern communications technology occasionally? Is that you don't like him working for a Government security service that has other personnel? I'm trying to define what the problem is.
Listen, it's an interesting discussion, no need to get all rallied up. I, for the most, am not discontent with the way they've handled things so far in the Craig era. Not that much, anyway. I don't like it that the Mi6 employees have that much of antenna time and protagonism. And I find that the writing of Bond films has been consistently poor and it relies too much on communication gimmicks. All my opinion, of course, as fallacious as it can be, in you own wording.
And you are absolutely right, "'Tiresome' does not equal 'incessant'". You surely are incessant, but not tiresome. See? That was a compliment ;) And yes, I 'm perfectly aware we've had this conversation before. No need to repeat ourselves in that regard. Cheers
Well no, it doesn't contain answers to those, that was my point and why I was replying to it. If you can't reply to those points then that's fine, I've proven mine and shown where you're wrong.
I'm not sure what 'rallied up' means, but if you're trying to infer I'm angry or something then that's rather a deflection. I think it's interesting too.
So it is that you don't like them using phones then? Do you include something like FRWL in this, in that he's in communication with HQ and working with MI6 personnel?
I think this is something rather fundemental about Bond: he's not on his own ever, he's part of a Government service and work with and talks to his superiors and colleagues. I think if that's not an idea you like then perhaps James Bond actually can't ever satisfy you.
And fishing for every film reference to counter your own would be stuff for a über-geeky-fan. "Q did this here but he did that there" or "In SF this but in SP that" just isn't the way I like spending the little time I usually spend in the forums. Mind you, it's fair game, just not my game. Do carry on.
That being said, as I can't reply to every point you make, I'll retreat my presence in the discussion. I do think I've made my point, btw.
Oh, and I didn't imply that you are angry, but I did imply that this point by point technique is aggressive. I suppose some other members will agree. Sometimes it's rather organised and simple to follow, other times it's just napalm in a forum's page.
For the last time: I have no love for the Mi6 team stuff, I have no love for the overuse of info tech gismos and cell phones in Bond films, I have no love for poor writing and narrative shortcuts. This was my point. I won't discuss it sine die. As you said, at least I am consistent.
And I've praised your opinions and works many times over for you to know I'm not aggressive or abusive or angry. So I hope we can leave it at that.
I've got a life to get to. Cheerio.
I have no problem with the amount of screen time provided to Moneypenny, Q, and M. In fact, I did not find it at all troublesome in SP (probably because the film had more serious issues).
I do think we have all these things not because of MI films, but because it is the 21st century, and espionage is different. So are terrorist networks and crime syndicates. I think Bond films have done a good job of placing MI6 (and its struggles) within the shifting paradigms of the 21st century. Where they struggled in SP is doing the same with the villains. CR, QoS, and SF did a much better job of demonstrating that the villains are actually out in the open, walkign among us, posing as people they aren't, outsourcing their evil deeds to people like Patrice.
*straying slightly offtopic here*
Read this about Dalton in SOME KIND OF HERO. John Glen, Richard Maibaum, and Maurice Binder also were asked to leave in 1991, even if there was a a third Dalton Bond. Binder died in 1991. There were three directors considered by Cubby, Ted Kotcheff, George Pan Cosmatos, and John Landis.
I agree that the "teamwork" trope has become an annoyance and needs to go.
But I really don't want to see M--any M--in the field again. It is a disservice to the character.
I am probably being a huge curmudgeon, but am I the only one who looks at the NTTD trailer and just sees quite run of the mill action and cinematography? Genuinely, apart from it being a Bond film, and so far more likely for me to give it the benefit of the doubt, I just don't see anything special about any of the shots or snippets we are shown...
I think it looks dull. And, coupled with the doubling down on everything SP did, really doesn't fill me with any confidence whatsoever.
Yeah, None of us can tell what to really expect from NTTD. But one thing that's Certain is, it's surely going to be better than SP....so that's a huge step forward. And it might sound minor, but another reason my interest in NTTD went a notch higher, is Zimmer's Involvement.
I'm surprised they were even considering that scumbag Landis after the TWILIGHT ZONE debacle.
Dalton and Cosmatos ended up working together on CHRISTOPHER COLUMBUS: THE DISCOVERY (Cosmatos was fired and Dalton quit).
Universal Just Told the World That Theaters Are No Longer the Priority
https://www.indiewire.com/2020/04/universal-vod-trolls-world-tour-theaters-1202227804/
COVID-19 UPDATE
For the health and safety of our staff, members and guests around the world, the Academy has postponed all screenings, events, tours, public programs and public access to our library and archive.
We appreciate your understanding, support and cooperation at this time. We look forward to welcoming everyone back when it is safe to do so.
The Academy
https://www.oscars.org/about/covid-19-update
Oscars Will Consider Films That Didn’t Play in Theaters as Part of New Academy Rules
https://variety.com/2020/film/awards/new-oscar-rules-movies-not-in-theaters-1234591702/
Apparently the AMC Theater chain are now boycotting Universal films due to these comments.
A war has begun!
Don't they also own Odeon?
I believe so. Not sure about that, actually.
Yeah just from hearing these remarks about the script, it seems like instead of scaling back from the ridiculousness of SP they decided to turn the knob up a few notches. I have a bad feeling that they didn’t learn lessons from SP.
https://www.slashfilm.com/comcast-sky-productions-halted/
----
Cinemas in California are still 'months away' from opening. 2020 is looking bleaker and bleaker.
https://www.thewrap.com/reopening-movie-theaters-and-concerts-in-california-still-months-away-governor-says/
AMC owns the largest cinema chain in Sweden. I have read somewhere that AMC has it hands on several large chains in the EU
Yeah, AMC owns Odeon in the UK - second biggest major chain following Regal/Cineworld.
While AMC may have been the ones to take the decisive action right now, I'd imagine Regal/Cineworld, Cinemark, Vue etc are feeling exactly the same. These major chains live and die by the theatrical exclusivity.
But what this does show is that Universal is likely to be on board - if not actually probably pushing for - releasing NTTD on VOD should cinemas still remain closed in November. Because odds of the landscape returning to normal and traditional releases being able to gross as much as they've done before the crisis get lower and lower the longer this goes on.
Equally, unless a model for straight to home or simultaneous releases develops that can earn as much revenue as would be required for a film as expensive as NTTD, should the crisis change the earning potential of traditional theatrical distribution and things really pivot to straight to home, budgets will have to be lower...these 2020/21 films may be the last mega budget blockbusters we see.
Good lord, this is incredibly stupid on everyone's part if so. It's like a circular firing squad.