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
And it isn't cool when Bond does it either! ;)
Well... just a little factoid here...
Iron Man the movie was way better then Batman....
Even the concept as you were explaining... =;
Let's just break it down real quick...
Tony Stark doesn't have to hide his face, living in the shadows, he just kicks their @$$.
He also has way better gadgets and being a playboy is a bad thing? Um... [NEWSFLASH] No, it's not. And then.... well you know what, I'll just stop there.. theres no point.
There's no contest.
2008s best Action film, Iron Man.
Second QOS.
That Batman movie was overrated, and wouldn't have been near as popular as is was if Heath hadn't died in real life before the opening... Sad over all, but that doesn't make the movie better than another just for sympathy. Sure, you may not think of it as sympathy, but how else did you hear about it in the first place..
[ON THE NEWS] "Heath Ledger, whos playing the villain in the next upcoming Batman film has died today.... "
Had to be vented.
Moving on.
First of all, The Dark Knight isn't even an action film. Calling it that is an insult. Iron Man can shoot off rockets all day, but no comic book movie franchise can match the depth and drama that the Nolan Batman films embody. And secondly, saying that TDK wouldn't be as popular if Heath wouldn't have died is absolute tripe. TDK isn't this popular because of Heath dying, that's complete hogwash. It is renowned because Heath gave a truly chilling, haunting, frightening, and down-right nightmarish performance. TDK is better than all the rest because it took itself seriously and finally gave us a comic book film that, like Batman Begins, surmounted the tropes of the comics lore and showed us a superhero film can be just as serious and deep as the award winning drama. TDK gives us an ordinary man fighting to save his loved ones and the very city of Gotham from a crazy psychopath who stops at nothing to watch the city burn. It is because of Heath taking the role so seriously that we get such a terror-inducing and memorable portrayal of Joker. TDK isn't held with such high regard out of sympathy. That's ludicrous. Heath's masterpiece IS this film, all culminating in a short life, but a life that showed us how much talent he had. TDK may be labeled by some as a simple action film, but that is so wrong. We have drama, emotion, depth, complexity, horror, and the feeling that it is all happening in front of us, like we are in Gotham feeling the pain of the city. TDK showed all the comic books films preceding and following it that they need to step their game up. Nolan, Bale and company will keep the Oscar seats warm, because no comic book film will ever reach their level. Heath put his heart and soul into that performance, and calling his acclaim sympathetic and only due to the fact that he died is complete treason. He deserves every accolade, every single plaque and medal. He deserved that Oscar dead or alive, and made a legacy for himself that will outlive us all through this brilliant performance. His time as the Joker may have been short, but we have that film to watch over and over, to show us what it looks like when an actor truly gives all of himself to a role. He has been cemented forever in the minds of Batman fans and filmgoers alike, making us smile at his craft, shriek at his horrific portrayal, and clap in the honor of him as the credits roll all in the space of a few hours. I have never sat in the theatre and cheered for the villain, but with TDK I couldn't help but smile at how happy Heath's devotion to his work in the acting profession made me. His legacy will truly outlive him, and deservedly so. And THAT isn't overrated.
I never expected this to have run so far when it first appeared a week or so ago
All the controversial opinions about Bond I think of right now have most likely been said either by myself or others so can't really think of any fresh input to add right now. I'll say anyway, right or wrong, Tina Turner if given the opportunity to do a Bond theme should of had the job in the 1980s at the very latest, 1995 for me was somehow a little too late on the timeline. Izabella Scorupco was a sometimes irritating Bond girl, Xenia was not the least bit intimidating, and I genuinely can't stand the end Eric Serra score at the closing titles 'Experience of Nausea'
The second half of Tomorrow Never Dies becomes almost void and redundant once Bond leaves for Asia, i.e. I simply lose interest more often than not
The teaser for The World Is Not Enough could quite possibly be the best and biggest PTS of the entire Bond series, Yes, I'm fairly confident there
That chap who kept popping up several times, can't remember his real name, but he was in the PTS of You Only Live Twice at the Houston control center, was in The Spy Who Loved Me when Moore sets the two missiles to collide with each other from the submarines, and there was another one or two examples in one or two other Bond films where he popped up, well I just got a bit irritated with him eventually
The tanker truck chase in LTK goes on far too long and is quite dull actually, I only like the bit at the conclusion usually to see Sanchez get burned at the end for all the atrocities he perpetrated
Just some other examples there, mentioned before or otherwise
Controversial opinion: Its impossible to keep Bond fans civil. Which I guess displays our passion ;)
Then just start ignoring them. I got on here when I got home form work, and this thread had 48 'unread' comments. I skimmed through them, and then posted mine. Not worth the time.
I think people's views on CR largely depend on whether they think the "formula" is what makes a good Bond film.
Who?
First of all, because something is in a book doesn´t make it better. I still do not like drama.
What I count as Bondian is what I love and recognise from the movie series that I have watched so many times that it´s impossible to even count the viewings. The books I see as a completely different thing. I respect them as original but don´t understand why Bond is supposed to follow those old outings. Fleming sold the film rights after all.
As an example, AC/DC´s first album in Australia was vastly different to their later outings, but it was the original. After that they have had a sound that they are recognised and loved for. It is the so called "AC/DC-sound". It wouldn´t be too bright to say "Back In Black is unAC/DC (if you understand the word I made up)", the original was different and therefore only that is the real AC/DC. Everything after that is not the true AC/DC. Perhaps not a fair comparision, but it was the first one I could come up with.
And the Batman movie, "The Dark Knight" I don´t like. Too much trying to be modern and gritty with too much drama, dark lens and whatever. It was also too long. Transporter 3 was number 1, followed by the good film that is QOS. TDK was ok.
How many Iron Man movies have you seen over the years...
(guess they got it right)
DC FAIL. (unless you have a celebrity death to promote your film)
Marvel. Win.
Just my opinion. The End.
So this is how it feels - like it?
..and HE should know of all people as he is the Mastermind of controversy...
When people are referring to Flemming then yes - its all about the books.
Perhaps I´m stupid, but I don´t understand what you mean. Would you care to elaborate on that, please?
Its from a few pages back and won't be able to tell you exactly. Was about arguments going on about Flemmings Bond where we have to refer to the books and it doesn't matter THEN, whether or not the films necessarely need to go by the books.
I understand, you don't care about the books - neither do I - but if you answer to an opinion about Flemming and books, it DOES matter.
Not to say that DaltonCraig007 doesn't have extreme opinions that he loves to shout about to us all.
Totally agree with you but feel that CR and QoS was made that way for exactly that reason with Bond being a blunt instrument and still learning his trade as 007 hence the gun barrel right after his two kills to get his 007 status at CR before that he wasn't 007 and the Barrel at the end of QoS to close the chapter on this Bond and for that reason why I like these 2 entries, it served its purpose. I honestly hope that Skyfall begins with gun barrel and bring back the Bond we All love with Monypenny, Q and some gadgets but not to much.
I share the same opinon
So, Bond's not supposed to follow the example set by what started it in the first place, but it is supposed to follow the example of what tossed out everything the books had.
Is LTK the last film to have scenes inspired by actual moments from Flemings books?