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
He's made a lot of clunkers since 2002.
No disrespect towards Campbell but he's no craftsman, he does a good job but nothing much more, maybe some don't want individual stamps on Bond and would prefer a film directed by a committee (essentially what EON has been in the past) but I don't think MGW or BB will want that with the reaction that came from their decision to hire an Oscar winning director for SF.
CR is great but look at what Campbell has done since, at best substandard and as for Spotiswoode and Donaldson I make no apologies for calling them hacks.
I'd rather have another Glen than another arty farty director who turns up, does one and never comes back, no matter how much praise and Oscar talk that one film gets.
SF was great but Mendes is already on about how tiring it is, etc. Now he could return, and if he does then that's fantastic, but I'm not sure he will.
Hmm...Metacritic has CR and SF tied at 81.
Maybe Campbell's true calling is Bond films.
Mendes or Campbell returing would be fine by me.
Logan supposedly started writing in August.
It wouldn't surprise me if this was the case. Logan has been rumoured to have pitched his ideas in October 2011. Everything should be set for November filming.
Another made by a committee entry, maybe that is satisfying to you but I think we've seen enough of those type of entries and EON know this, the next entry won't be a Glen or a Campbell it will more like Mendes, Boyle or maybe Tom Hooper.
Only a Bond fan would sing the praises of John Glen.
CR feels like it has a lot more action.
The first time that I watched SF I found it to be surprisingly dreary; I guess I was expecting something much more "light". When I saw it the second time I didn't find it dreary or dark at all, but I think that CR has more glamour to it which makes me and others like it more. I think that SF is the better film but CR is more enjoyable. There's an element of wish fulfillment to CR and a bit of a feeling of escapist adventure.
I think you've summed up how I feel about these two films pretty well. I'm really intrigued to see how SF works in a decade. CR has cemented itself as one of the best entries in the canon IMO. I'll be interested to see if SF has the repeat value of CR, in the same way FRWL is a splendid film but not one I'd turn to on a soggy Sunday afternoon.
People won't be calling it the best Bond ever when Bond 24 comes out, that's for sure.
I doubt, that's a given. It doesn't happen with every new Bond film coming out, as we know.
Having said that, I would love for it to be true, but to overtake SF with the next, critically and financially, they have to work some small miracles, as expectations will be even more sky high then ever. I am not sure, it can be done. If they manage to make another sccessful film, they did a great job. RT wise in the 80is and BO wise in the 800 range would be considered a success by me.
Without a doubt. I remember the days when DAD was declared the best ever. I don't for a minute want to compare this notion with SF but as you say I think it will slip down certain people's rankings. I think it'll be solidly regarded as part of the upper echelon but it's so hard to determine as most of us have been watching the rest of the canon over and over for decades. B24 has it's work cut out, all I hope is that they build on what they have and don't rush it out. There's the potential for it to deliver a knock out blow but there's still room for improvement IMO and I hope they capitalise on it.
Actually, Spielberg is the front-running Oscar contender for Best Director this year for Lincoln.
I hope, he gets it, too.
I haven't seen it yet, but I've heard really good things. I'm pulling for Skyfall in all categories!
Not with the critics, but on sites like this, there are certain people who go mad over the new film then as the hype dies down, it slips down their rankings and all the flaws they said weren't there will suddenly be there. And then the next film comes out and the cycle continues.
I think lots of people who rank SF really highly (lets say in their top 3) will eventually move it down, most likely around Bond 24 time.
I love SF and it's a top 5 Bond film for me but that being said, I'd probably rank it as 5th on my list and without hesitation I can say I feel CR is a better film overall and that's largely due to CR having a better sense of atmosphere, better score, more visceral performance from Craig, more and better action, more glamorous and a broader sense of escapism, aided with gorgeous Bobdian establishing shots.
This is where Phillip Seymour Hoffman or Kevin Spacey (most likely the latter if DC can get Sam Mendes back) can make their mark.
Maybe the villain could be more 3-dimensional like Silva but more of the type that would scare the audience and produce a manhunt when Bond is after him to such an extent that the final fight could be an original footchase to give new things for the series to try....this wouldn't be a the same kind of footchase we've seen where Bond hides behind a pillar with a gun but something different that would put a lid on these CSI-type shows or Dexter and make a statement that the Bond series can make their same material but even better. This would also incorporate some new fans who aren't typical Bond fans as well (the fanbase for Bond is pretty loyal).
http://www.dailystar.co.uk/rehab/view/294108/Daniel-Craig-is-licence-to-till/
Should it warrant a new thread or no?