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
1. LOIS MAXWELL
2. BARBARA BOUCHET (CR 67)
3. PAMELA SALEM (NSNA)
4. CAROLINE BLISS
5. NAOMIE HARRIS
6. SAMANTHA BOND
Absolutely. I think this exemplifies why Brosnan's run ended up the way it did, Goldeneye not withstanding. The action movies of the mid to late 90's where chock full of disaster movies and action packed cheese fest's such as Face Off, Con Air and Batman Forever. This was Bond taking note of the competition.
Controversial Moneypenny opinion: I've always though Samantha Bond was great as Moneypenny. Her interaction with Pierce's Bond was always entertaining.
With all the flaws of the Brosnan era, I'd take them all, except for DAD, over most of the action movies of the 90s.
Not controversial to me. I loved Samantha Bond.
Considering the lists above, that isn't controversial at all. For me Sam Bond was the epitomy of a secretary, and a rather useless one at that. I never understood the appeal to her.
I actually like Harris in the role. They overdid her introduction a bit, making her a field agent first, but after that she does take on the role pretty good. Yes, @bondjames, I do find her beautiful, but not in a, how should i put it, steamy way. Not in the way I like the Bondgirls. But MP shouldn't be like that, she should be more reserved, caring in a different way. Harris does that. For me the scenes in Macau worked because of that. It was flirting for fun, not to actually be a fantasy. Bond is too professional to bed his direct collegues (Fields doesn't count, she's stationed in some hell hole, and he was using her to stay there).
And an excellent Sherlock Holmes on the BBC in the mid-60s.
I don't agree--there's a lot between Leiter's maiming and Bond's actual revenge, including Bond infiltrating Sanchez's organization and turning its members against each other (inspired by Kurosawa's Yojimbo), and Bond's realization that he can't wreak vengeance by himself and without consequences. What I like is that film complicates the vengeance plot (certainly more so than Fleming's Live and Let Die did).
I also like Q's scenes--there's nothing wrong with giving an otherwise grim movie some tonal variety with a broad gags. And Dalton treats Q with more underlying respect than Moore (whose relationship with Q barely rose above mutual belittling), just as Q assumed a fatherly air toward Dalton's Bond. I love him telling Bond "without Q branch you'd have been dead years ago!"
As for Koskov and Whittaker in TLD, they're great minor villains. But in TLD they're standing in for a non-existent major villain. Every great Bond film must have a great villain, a swirling vortex of pure evil that Bond must extinguish at great risk. Bond is a modern day St. George versus the dragon, and for the film to really work, you need a nasty-enough dragon.
Agreed. LTK does have one of the best plots of the series. The only thing that stops it being a top tier film in the series, in my opinion, is the slightly low key, made for TV look and style it has. There are times when it feels more like an extended episode of Miami Vice. A product of its time, of course. But anyone who has issues with it being generic in terms of plot are way off the mark.
In LTK, when they want to project Bonds angst and anger, they simply leave it to the actor and the plot to convey it. In Skyfall, they feel the need to club us over the head with psyche evaluations, childhood memories and moody shots of Bond staring off into the distance..
Your thoughts mirror exactly mine.
Skying is not the kind of activity I'd be thinking of doing with Naomi Harris. I always found her far too sexy for Moneypenny.
@Revelator Maybe I'm unfair but always found that LTK lacked something Bondian that other movies, even lesser ones, had. The literary equivalent is DAF.
I adore Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace, but it has nothing to do with Craig. I would probably like them infinitely more with Brosnan or Dalton type actor as the lead.
I wonder what the influence will be this time? The most talked about and critically acclaimed film in this community (and perhaps in the general market) is MI: Fallout. I don't think it's a coincidence that there have been some changes to B25's planning since that film was released. 3 female characters including a reported agent, a past love and mystery woman? Familiar, if true.
Gray is the unheralded supporting character in the Bond pantheon.
I think we completely agree. The thing is, I think a Maxwell moneypenny wouldn't work anymore these days as it's too much of a role model of old. And then Harris's MP is just about the best we can get.
When we're discussing the crew, the only one I've got some issues with is our new M. In SF he worked perfectly, but in SP he seemed to have lost his edge. I was truly wondering if this was supposed to be a lieutenant colonel who'd been captured by the IRA or some bureacrat lost on too high a level. He seems lost to fight C. The dialogue is flimsy and he's Always on the backfoot. That's not how I know bureaucrats at that level, and I know quite a few.
And while I'm at it, the 00-section is a small section directly under M, head of MI6. So that whole 'sorry guys we're stopping the program'bit makes no sense at all. It's time EON started to consult real bureaucrats.
Agreed. He seemed out of his depth. I wasn't sure if they were trying to show him as incompetent or what. Perhaps it was a remnant of the earlier script when he was meant to be the 'bad' (preceding the creation of C)?
@mattjoes at least in SF Mallory commanded some authority. Both in the hearing scene as afterwards. But in SP all that professionalism was gone. I don't mind his age, he could've been a career military who's indeed very talented, but seeing his behaviour..... it doesn't add up. @bondjames the whole meeting with Ç'comes over as an afterthought, so perhaps that's the reason.
Not being too familiar with all the British accents; what's wrong with Harris' accent?
A classic case of lost potential to me. Good actor, quite interesting character background and yet it turned out like a dull soap opera for some reason... Speaks for the film in general I guess.
Agree wholeheartedly.