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
Really? Craig’s Bond has spent more than a decade riffing on Bourne and throwing in cheap bits of nostalgia for the “I CLAPPED! I CLAPPED WHEN I SAW THE THING!” types.
Mission gives a good time. Bond spends too much time up it’s own arse with preachy characters like Madeline criticizing Bond’s life.
This.
The only film with Craig that has an actual plot is CR
Obviously with some adjustments, man that would have been a great Bond film.
I always wanted that in a Bond-film (with our without stunt doubles)! It's such a wonderful stunt, especially with GoPro cameras attached to it! But now "Mission: Impossible" is again the first action film with that 😔. Anyway, good luck Tom Cruise.
Well, give me that car chase (with a ragdoll of an old BMW 5-series) and it's subsequent bike chase over that underdeveloped 'dance' of cars in Rome in "SPECTRE". Moreover, your criticism about that "Fallout" chase sequence to me sounds like a load of bull. It was edited in such a way, that it felt dangerous, it felt real, and the choice of camera angles, low to the road, and seeing Cruise using his gear stick, added to the suspense. Best car sequence since "Ronin".
It fits much better to Tom´s M:I, because Bond is no such adrenalin junkie.
What can I say? To me that sequence always looks like it´s trying to do something like Ronin, but it´s not even in the same ball park. The camera´s pov is much too much inside the action, and changes too often, to really get anywhere near that visceral feeling Ronin had. That FO chase always makes me think of the camera men, and that´s not a good thing.
Who cares for SP, when both M:I (RN) and Bond (QoS, I know not everybody digs the editing, but that´s one hell of a car chase) had recent car chases that were considerably more to the point. And if we´re talking about the best car chase since Ronin, it would be sacrilege to omit Bourne and Mad Max ;-).
Bond was an adrenaline junkie first. During this intense ski chase in OHMSS. During the cliff jump in TSWLM. During an entire underwater chase in TSWLM. During the first ever parachute ski dive jump ever caught on the big screen in MR. Bond = an adrenaline junkie. Period. Especially the Cinematic incarnation of Bond. PS: I also said, "with or without stunt doubles".
It´s not about who did what first, but about the two of them being different characters with different outlooks on life.
I get preferring the tone and action of MI but plot seems a weird thing to single out. Cruise has admitted that they basically come up with action scenes and fill in the blanks and imo it shows. The plots are all fairly generic standard spy film stuff, an excuse for Tom Cruise to jump off things. The Craig era hasn't had any mind blowing plots either but that's because they're going for a more character driven approach, which is something MI really doesn't have. Ethan Hunt does not feel like a real person. He's the blandest most generic possible action hero. In fact all the characters in MI are fairly bland stock character stereotypes.
And Bond just is in a different league imo. Even the worst Bond films have a magic around them because of the rich legacy of the brand and the unique cocktail of ingredients that make up a Bond film that's impossible to recreate. When Cruise gets too old, MI will die. Because it's basically a less sexy, less edgy Bond knock off that serves as an excuse for Tom Cruise to jump off things. They're very well made films don't get me wrong, but the only unique thing about it is the team dynamic and they ruined any chance of that making a difference by casting Tom Cruise. Bond meanwhile will outlive all of us because it's something truly special.
Fallout didn't really have any twists. It was just balls to the wall - and that's why it succeeded, imo. It was fairly unapologetic about it.
Nah, I'd have to disagree there. I think the key difference is that with Fallout it felt a bit more natural, with (maybe) the exception of Julia's inclusion. That is a lot to do with the film's breakneck pace, but it still felt a lot more thought out than Spectre did as well as just being more enjoyable all round.
It's possible that it's because I expected more from Spectre in comparison.
Great remark Mr Ireland 🇮🇪 😉. Fully agree.
And I’m especially not a fan of the series ditching the revolving door of new and interesting directors giving their own take on a M:I film. In a sense, this series really lost something.
It was odd just how often Ethan Hunt said he was sorry in Fallout.
The motif of the choices he he makes having an adverse effect on other people has been there since M:I-3, so it didn't strike me as odd at all.
She was a love interest in ROGUE NATION. It was always more than professional and courteous. The fact that the story didn't have them together at the end doesn't nullify that. She was always going to come back and they made the right call in doing so - and the fact that her motives were ambigous throughout the most recent film kept that relationship pretty consistent. And they're still no more a couple, officially onscreen, than they were at the end of RN.
This I do agree with, but thankfully Walker was there to keep it interesting for me. A solid villain.
Though they certainly did not simply repeat themselves, so I'm fine with it. McQuarrie did pretty well to distinguish himself from the previous film. He's a versatile dude. Though I can certainly appreciate what the individual directors, except maybe Woo, have brought to their respective films. So I get it.
Tah, Mr. Dutchman! 🇳🇱
This may be a first!
In RN an attraction is hinted, sure, but I liked that ultimately no boundaries were crossed, and I never got the sense that she was set up to be a recurring character. Her story felt very self contained. It's only after the film came out that they decided to bring her back because they liked her that much, and pushing that attraction further for me lessened her as a character.
Was that Cavil's character? He didn't leave much of an impression. Admittedly, it's the only film in the series I didn't bother getting on blu-ray so I haven't even revisited it yet.
Umm... no.
John Woo > McQuarrie
Though I'll give McQuarrie this: He's better than Abrams.
Not a chance. I love Woo dearly but M:I-2 is an awful, awful film and he should never have been given the gig.
A fair point, even if I didn't find it all that noticeable thanks to the pacing.
I wish more action flicks were as “awful” as M:I-2!
Funnily, of all the flicks, it’s the only one of the series where Hunt is never a rogue or disavowed!