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
Brilliantly said! Calm down everyone. We are all fans. Let's enjoy Bond and this site.
AND to add: I also miss a GREAT, LONG and EXCITING PTS as well as a truly memorable villain!
Right on target. DC likes Daniel but not as Bond, at least not yet. I'm glad to see he is optimistic about SkyFall, which I guess is all you can ask of anyone who holds his views. He calls CR and QOS "un-Bondian", which he or anyone else is entitled to, yet there are Bondian moments which they conveniently ignore. ALL Bond films contain Bondian moments, some more than others, but they are there if one opens up their mind. Conversely, we've got folks like DC who defend all Moore and some Brosnan era movies as "Bondian", when the fact is is that there are very likely just as many moments in those films where they were anything but Bondian in nature.
What gets me here, something DC has yet to address, is that the moment "Dressed To Kill" rendered a negative opinion of some of Moore's Bond films, he dragged Craig and negative views right into it. So all being fair, why shouldn't Steve be allowed to do the same thing? Because he is a Craig "cultist"?
Moore films had some memorable henchmen by the way. Jaws is legendary and would have been so until they pushed the envelope too far with his character and turned him into another comedy figure. The LALD crew was great. Locque was good and never even uttered a line. The Connery henchmen remain the best, but Dalton has Dario, and Brosnan had Onatopp. The Craig era has yet to see the likes of that.
I beg your pardon, DC007, I'm a Craig fan, and I rarely post silly pictures (or pictures, for that matter).
What? Huh? I was talking about Q returning for Skyfall, which we've known now for a good deal of time.
imo, if there is a Young Q, it would be better to the film to be without a Q.
I think people are so against it because we had the wonderful Desmond for so long, and for a good chunk he was quite up there in age, and now people have the conception that all Qs should be older or they won't be good. Just wait until you see Skyfall before you pass judgements everyone.
Actually that is the fact, Desmond was great. Not saying that the Actor would be bad, but the fact that he is young. It doesn't fits. But maybe you're right, maybe after i see the film my opinion may change.
I feel the series could do fine without any Q, but a fresh take on Q might be just the ticket, since no one can fill the shoes of the original M, Moneypenny, and Q. Just ask Robert Brown, Caroline Bliss, or John Cleese--all pale imitations of the originals.
Obviously, people are polarized over Judi Dench but, since Lee had been dead for 15 years, give the filmmakers credit for doing something different.
Spot on! I also miss the villain lairs with guards in uniforms. And the Roger Moore-esque tone of the movies he made.
Holy crap, you are still here!
I died, but it sucked so I came back.
They had to use a defibrillator on me when I flatlined. I didn't see any of the stupid "white light" or "heaven's gates".
Perhaps you saw your version of heaven: the 1930's/1940's?
I just remembered that I really miss a scene where the villain shows Bond his evil plan. Those are always great.
I don't miss the plan unveilings. That is just the mark of a bad villain, or a naive one. It just gives Bond more time to escape, and any villain that says everything about his plan is a fool, because the hero could escape and ruin everything. Just allude to how horrible it will be, or commence the plan and kill the hero while the evil unfolds so he dies knowing he has failed miserably.
Sound great to me. The villain hates Bond so much that he has to shove his plan in Bond's face and tease him with it. And after that put him in another stupid death trap which Bond escapes. Ingenious! The villain must regret not shooting Bond later.
Except it shows just how stupid that villain is, even though the entire film has built up just how smart the villain is.
The "villain explaining his plan" works in some films but not others. It really worked for GF because of Goldfinger's character and personality. But it definitely would not have worked for Sanchez in LTK - he was too cagey and secretive to give away information. When you try to shoehorn certain elements into a film where they don't belong then it feels forced and artificial. If you try to create a film where all those things do fit in then it feels stale and like a retread - I don't want to watch the exact same film 23 times.
One thing that I would like to see return if possible is the return of the big villain's lair. I know that the Ice Palace in DAD in considered a good one but to me the last "classic" example would be the dish installation in GE. Unfortunately in this era of surveillance satellites it would be incredibly hard to make it credible.
Announce the title of the next film during the end credits (might be asking for too much here...)
He shouldn't reveal it to Bond, but I always liked it when the villian had a big plan reveal to his allies. Like when Blofeld would tell SPECTRE what they were going to do next, or in GF when Goldfinger reveals his plan to his investors (even if they weren't his real ones).
Something else I wish is when the villian would kill disloyal henchmen or anyone else he wanted dead in different, wierd ways. Like the shark in TSWLM, the dogs in MR, etc.
CR had humour, and SF is going to have more humour than the last two films.
what are you doing on a Bond forum, or even watching Bond movies ? you want films that aren't anything like Bond films !!
I am very much gobsmacked by your numerous racist, rude comments, and your complete ignorance of the Bond franchise.
Oh boy, I read through 3 pages of your usual comments, which are as predictable as prdictable goes and kept my mouth closed, but this is overdoing it again. You call other people rude? Ridiculous...you haven't changed a bit.
BTW - how sure can you be, he is even serious? Double standard all the way. Sam with actonsteve. Just because you might have said something positive twice or so doesn't change your reputation or your attitude.
Re Q - a young geek makes much more sense in these days and I am sure, holds the clue to some funny and entertaining moments.
maybe you should have checked his posts in the thread 'how would you feel if a Black James Bond was cast' before posting your usual rubbish attacks......
and of course I see the Craig fanboys can do anything they like because they are the bosses of Bond forums..... but if someone questions them, of course he is wrong and should keep his mouth shut and let them continue their usual Craig worshipping.....
germanlady you should accept that Craig fans can be wrong sometimes.... and that they are not the holder of truth.... it's getting tiresome to see the usual Craig-fanboys gang acting like they own the place........
dear me.... how did I dare try to question a Craig fan..... because they are always right......
Sorry for my ignorance, but in which films has he been?
Anybody who believes Roger Moore is the best bond in my opinion is the one with ignorance to Bond Franchise.
I just want Bond to stay serious and realistic, he's a field agent with a license to kill for godsakes. Im all in favor for alittle humor and soft joking here and there, but it can't be over-done either. The moore era relied on silly stunts, silly characters, silly humor and silly writing. Nothing at all could be taken seriously. Roger was way too old for the part from the beginning, its ashame Dalton turned down the role when first offered it. All of the Fleming book titles used for all of Moore's 007 film titles should have been called other names due to the fact the films had nothing in common to the books at all hardly.