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
Can imagine it will withstand many repeat viewings, and become a classic. Staple for Christmas TV for decades to come
The last time Bond felt as special as TGM does right now, you would have to go back to CR.
Skyfall was a much, much bigger movie than CR.
In terms of BO figures yes. Like TB was to GF.
But in terms of universal praise, putting Bond back on the map again, rejuvenating the franchise, CR is now more fondly looked back on than SF is, the same way GF is compared to TB.
This is a generalisation, I know. But I'm basing it on current and past reviews I have read over the years (too many to mention). SF was lucky in that it hung on the curtails of 50 year anniversary, where the marketing machine was in full force.
No, that's all just among a certain breed of fan. Even Metacritic has Skyfall above Casino Royale. Spectre and NTTD also outgrossed CR. That's some rejuvenation.
Retrospective feelings don't change the fact that Bond was a whole hell of a lot bigger in 2012 than in 2006. And neither was quite what TGM is, certainly not CR!
But all this is a moot point. Craig makes the call that he wants Bond to die (a call he should have never been allowed to make) and Babs Broccoli falls over backwards trying to accommodate him. Because it’s Craig and we give into anything he wants. A real shame.
So it doesn’t really matter. You know what Craig demanded and that’s why the death isn’t genuine. It’s contrived. They would have made up any scenario to kill him off because that’s what needed to happen. He might as well have just picked up a gun and shot himself in the head.
Bottom line - There’s no reason for Bond to die EVER. Coming up with various scenarios to have Bond survive (no matter how contrived) makes sense. That’s how it’s always been. Our hero survives, no matter what. But coming up with various scenarios to actually kill Bond makes no sense.
No it was Skyfall, two films back. Coming with the London Olympics; Bond and the Queen jumping out of a helicopter; the largest-grossing British ever to date; Adele's song being huge, being the first Bond UK No.1 and winning the first Bond song Oscar... it was absolutely massive and incredibly special. Probably the last time a lot of us felt properly proud of being British, but that's another story...
I disagree that CR is 'now more fondly looked on'; but even if it were true, the perception of it now would have nothing to do with the assertion that "The last time Bond felt as special as TGM does right now, you would have to go back to CR". Unless you're talking about how special TGM feels now... in ten years time..?! :))
I thought it was quite a bit more than fine, but God yeah was it predictable. And that's okay--it's quite an art assembling that many cliches into something as fresh-feeling and entertaining as TGM was!
Don’t think, do. Why Top Gun Maverick is such a snoozefest (contains spoilers)
The movie is mostly good for like 3/4 in, and then it kinda lost me once they crash into Not-Russia.
“Oh look, there’s the one hangar deck that we missed blowing up which happens to have an F14 ready to fly. How convenient for us!”
I also can’t help but think of how it’s just a big showboat for Cruise with minimal humility. I get he’s the star, but I think you could do something besides say “I can do anything these kids half my age even better, I can break the rules and always get away with them, DON’T THINK JUST DO IT!”
The only time they kind of dial that back is when Hangman comes to the rescue, which you could see a mile away, but it’s still appreciative that Tom Cruise isn’t totally infallible, he’s also just lucky.
I can see all that, yeah. I also got a slight Space Cowboys vibe, which is not necessarily a complaint. If you haven't seen that film, Clint Eastwood, Tommy Lee Jones, James Garner, and Donald Sutherland have to go take care of an old Soviet satellite before it crashes into Earth (or something) and the reason the geezers have to do it is because all the hot shot lamebrain young people don't understand the old tech (or something).
:))
It's a pretty nice little movie, and probably a particularly wonderful experience for its target demographic, so no complaints there.
IMDB has CR above SF, and Rotten Tomatoes has CR higher than SF too, for both reviews and audience rating. I noticed you chose to leave these particular stats out... ;)
Either way, you are right. Neither CR or SF are what TGM is. I hope one day we get a Bond film that can rival TGM.
Are you the grumpy old man... ;)
I don’t think we’ll ever see a Bond film rival TGM in the US. Bond has not been giant event in the states since 60s Bondmania. It’s had hits since then, but never coming close to other contemporary films that Americans gobble up like candy.
I didn't leave it out, I didn't look! I'm sure 2006/7 was a crazy level of Bondmania for jetsetwilly and many others, but in the world at large, Casino Royale was not quite as big a deal as Ice Age 2. :))
You're probably right about that. Skyfall was pretty huge though, as it was everywhere.
I remember when Goldeneye came out, and I was living in California, and the mood was sort of, "Oh, they've made another Bond film after all!" and it was a slightly-more-than-modest hit.
Sounds like you aren't a big fan of CR then either...
https://www.boxofficemojo.com/year/2006/?grossesOption=totalGrosses
Maybe it was more of a phenomenon in the UK, but in the US it pretty much did about as well as all the Brosnan titles more or less. A very respectable box office hit, just not as impressive compared to international.
Despite the fact that even though at second place, CR was about only a million dollars below.
With the risk of stepping in that trap of beeing seen as a 40+ man who's (supposedly) missing purpose in life (that is rather far from the truth), I disagree with this assessment. To my mind TG-M does exactly what it says on the tin, and what people expect from it. It's a flat-out fun aviation film with no pretenses whatsoever. The volleyball scene in the original was (afak) never meant to be homo-erotic. Fine if critics who seek meaning in every scene find it arousing or politically (in)correct, but it was only there to show their teambuilding. And that's how it's used in this film as well.
That bit about Maverick standing up to 'drones taking over' has no other meaning than to set the stage for the mission: of course it would be a drone mission today! But you can't build a blockbuster movie around a drone!
And that 'don't think' 'lesson' is undone in the funny exchange between Rooster and Maverick, so that point also flies out the window.
Leaves me to say I find this critic a bit too critical in the wrong points. Cruise has stated it is a loveletter to aviaton, and I think it is. The story doesn't make too much sense when you actually think of it, but we're told not to do that anyway. But the first film didn't make that much sense either. If there's any underlying message, it has more to do with keeping promises and making choises for your family than anything else. And I think that was done tastefully too.
Seems to me it's a love letter to Tom Cruise :) Not that there's anything wrong with that!
You know, I always found it weird how people spoke about the first movie being homoerotic or whatever. Sure, if you wanted to you could interpret that way I suppose... But we're talking about guys (and gals) who put their lives on the line and need to be able to rely and trust their colleagues 100%. I always saw it as team building and the military trying to instil some much needed comararderie between the aviators despite the competition. I think Maverick does a better job of driving that point home.
I'm not quite sure you can manouvre an F35 through a canyon like that. Then again, I know of no county that builds nuclear reactors at the end of a gorge whilst putting SAM-systems on its edges. But hey, who cares, it makes for a suspenseful ride!
hahaha well, to Maverick. You can see he loves the character. Which is fair game. I think they took a page out of Tombraider's playbook with the 'talk to me Goose' and then somebody saying something Goosey (couldn't resist) immediately after.
All in all it's a perfectly executed, perfectly fine goosebumb-inducing blockbuster. And Iceman's appearance was cool too. Love the fact they adedded that.
This theory could be applied to most movies, right? When the hero is at their darkest point, everything after that is a dream?
It actually happens in one of my favorite movies, Brazil, though.
Repo Men too.
That ending of Brazil is such an incredible gut punch. I love it.