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
I love how people complain about M being in the films too much when they know the plot demands it. Get real. The plot is about her past coming back to haunt her, so obviously she will be central in the plot. We may even get shots of her through flashbacks.
- we have a very orginal PCS. A hovercraft chase!
- we have Bond with a long beard being tortured
- we have a classic hotel scene with Bond shaving and acting like BOND!
- we have a tense sword fight between Bond and the villain
- we have wonderfully shot Cuba-scenes with Bond doing some real spying
Sadly the Iceland scenes in the 2nd part of the movie were a complete letdown!
But, the things you mentioned are also drawbacks and regretful. Yes, Bond was tortured, but for 14 months! He would've escaped by then, and after he gets traded over the writers did nothing interesting with the incarceration. Nothing about Bond locking up mentally or being haunted by the tortures. He just escapes from MI6 and goes to a hotel. WHAT A LETDOWN. Then we have the revered DAD sword fight. Injured already by Madonna's presence, the film was knowingly sped up for the scene to make Pierce look the least bit formidable. If the film of the scene wasn't sped up, it'd be more like Rog trying to beat up a villain in a fist fight more than Sean going toe to toe with Grant.
How could MI-6 let Bond be tortured for 14 months? they should run for him after 1 week at minimum.
How could MI-6 let Bond be tortured for 14 months? they should run for him after 1 week at minimum.
[/quote]
Just one of the many Earth sized plot holes in the so called perfect 1st half of DAD.
[/quote]
Maybe he was expendable. That's normally the explaination in films ;)
lol, after all he done for MI-6? Well, they are very thankful for him... Well actually they really need to be rigid.
[/quote]
Clearly, the plot reason was that the screenwriters wanted to give Graves time to change his face.
They didn't come up with a more credible reason for the characters' (M, etc.) abandonment of Bond.
It led the way for future movies between a parental guidance and a '15' certificate
See Goldeneye, TND, TWINE, Die another Day, Royale, QOS etc theater releases
Batman was where it all started, License to Kill was released about a week or two before incidentally and went with a '15', which I think was appropriate enough given the content
For those not old enough to remember summer 1989 was a bonanza of Movie releases such as Batman, Lethal Weapon II, Indiana Jones, Back to the Future and The Abyss all around the same time as LTK coming out to a general audience, Bond sort of took a back seat if you will, there was simply too much competition in such a short space of time
Priceless. You really should go into stand up sir.
'It was the first modern day Bond film'?
What does that even mean? Every Bond film is modern day when it is released - then it becomes less modern until eventually it becomes old. The concept is popularly known as 'time'.
Youre already on pretty shaky ground trying to defend DAD as it is but if that incoherent argument is the best you can offer perhaps you ought to reconsider your position lest you make a bigger buffoon of yourself?
Oh you already have:
'Zao was indeed a cool henchman'.
I might as well not bother going to see it. If this is true, the film is going to suck.
God forbid they use a world renown actresses ACTING TALENT in their movie. Why not hire Joe Blow off the street to play M then?
She'll be in Skyfall and then likely no more, so stick through it while the rest of us enjoy Dench's presence.
And I so don't want to know about M's past coming back to haunt her... again.
Dench was no where near the root of the problems in QoS. In fact her sub-plot was probably one of the stronger parts of that film.
And if it sends Dench out on a high note, they can go back to her 5th grade and I'd be happy.
No. I'm just saying the acting in that film out shines everything else. She played a large part because they played their strengths. Thats what they're doing here, too. Every M is different, hers just has a closer relationship to Bond, probably because she's a big name actress.
When they hired her in Goldeneye, she wasn't, and then slowly, through her separate career, she became more powerful. You don't just let someone that talented sit on the sideline.
You really should blame the writers, not Eon, not Dench, not Craig or anyone else.
1) i think a North Korean jail would probarly be the most hardest place to escape especially with armed guards and being tortured and weak Bond would have died trying to escape- he is not a superhuman after all
2) well i was suprised by the lack of security but less padding
3) that was Madonna? wow i thought that was Christina Applegate from married with children. even if it was Madonna it wasnt totally bad
'It was the first modern day Bond film'?
What does that even mean? Every Bond film is modern day when it is released - then it becomes less modern until eventually it becomes old. The concept is popularly known as 'time'.
Youre already on pretty shaky ground trying to defend DAD as it is but if that incoherent argument is the best you can offer perhaps you ought to reconsider your position lest you make a bigger buffoon of yourself?
Oh you already have:
'Zao was indeed a cool henchman'.
[/quote]
well it was the first 21st Century Bond film...so what im being honest yes Die Another Day wasnt the best Bond Film (when it first came out i hated it) but looking back on it now recently i can see some good in it...but thats my opinion you have the right to yours so maybe you should re-evaluate your post and stop acting like a unpleasent person
[/quote]
I wonder myself why so many people say the first half of DAD was any good. Everyone in it act so darn schizophrenic: Bond forgets he suffered for 14 months, M forgets her best agent for 14 months (14 months of torture where he could have cracked and reveal secrets), then imprison him, then Bond easily escapes MI6 (they should hire North Korean security as subcontractors next time, I guess) and shows up in a luxury hotel like a hobo and nobody throws him out!
I think Mendes cannot make SF this bad even if he was trying. I am not the biggest fan of him (American Beauty is one of the most overrated movie to ever win an Oscar IMO), but he is a capable director, he has a strong cast and the plot, with all the reservations one can have about it (from what we know it is a bit déjà vu, but so was the traitor in MI6 in CR, yet it worked perfectly) simply cannot be that recycled, unimaginative and filled with sci fi elements.
One of the rules in espionage is that when you lose a spy he gets disowned by his own goverment. That is what happened with 007 for 14 months. He was not happy about the exchange if you remember and wanted to take revenge on Zao for the exchange. Nobody trusted 007 because they were pretty sure he had leaked secrets, which he undoubtely had. But you can be quite sure he did not know a large amount of damaging knowledge that could not be changed in an instant.
M found her trust in 007 since he acted himself going after Zao and doing that in his own destructive manner but very focused on a goal. She did not condemn him for talking in his circumstances since she was knowledgable enough he would have sung as a canary, but who wouldn't in such a situation. 007 earned her trust by doing what he does best: Mayhem. And through those actions he generally gets his man/woman.
The critically well received CR suffers in my humble opinion the same problem the recent 007 vehicles suffered, the ending was action over substance. The ending of OHMSS was heartbreaking because 007 was struck by tragedy which hurt him and the movie ends that way.
CR has a similar ending in the book, Bond got hurt by a woman he trusted while doing his job. Instead we get the whole bloody sinking house shoot out as a spectacular over the top ending. It would have been much better for the movie it they had taken the book's course how she commited suicide due to her betrayal and that it really hurts James Bond. And then him finding the trail she left behind and taking care of mr White. Which would have made a much more emotional ending and would have shown the world that the new course was one of an excellent actor in the role of 007 and using that skill.
I call the ending of DAD & CR to similar in over the top action instead of using some drama. Which could have been the case with the murder of his father in DAD.
And here's why:
Technically, TSWLM, TLD and TND all fell on an anniversary and they were all decent films. The reason DAD had so many 'homages' was because as well as it being the 40th anniversary it was also the 20th film in the official canon. This no doubt amplified their wanting to cram all these homages into the film. I'm tired of hearing people spit on DAD. Some of us on this forum love it, and that's coming from someone who rates FRWL and CR at the top of his list. Diss another day.