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
Perhaps a big billboard or something, like British Airways in MR.
He's in for trouble with the wife.
Break it open make it happen :)
“I was in the Bahamas, working on a movie called 'After The Sunset' and my agents called me up and said, ‘Negotiations have stopped. [Producers Barbara Broocoli and Michael Wilson] are not quite sure what they want to do. They’ll call you next Thursday’ " the actor says in the book. "I sat in Richard Harris’s house in the Bahamas, and Barbara and Michael were on the line —‘we’re so sorry.’ She was crying, Michael was stoic and he said, ‘You were a great James Bond. Thank you very much,’ and I said, ‘Thank you very much. Goodbye.’ That was it. I was utterly shocked and just kicked to the curb with the way it went down.”
This couldn't have been easy for him to take.
I agree. Nothing unprofessional about it. This was difficult for everyone concerned, but a strategic decision had been made, and for the better imho. Unfortunately, there were casualties, regrettably.
http://www.jborbisnonsufficit.com/2015/11/25/brand-new-objects-in-007-online-shop/
Great interview between Mendes and Bennett Miller.
It's pretty in-depth on the spoilers.
-Mendes reveals the heart of the movie is the love affair with Madeline.
-He says the Tangier sequence in the middle of the film is his favourite in the film
-Mendes says that Jez Butterworth deserved a credit for his work on Skyfall
-Mendes talks about the influence of Kingsley Amis on the SP's torture sequence
See, Mendes knows how to talk and highlight intricacies that may or may not be there in his Bond films but the overall execution for cohesiveness of the story and; establishing characters and relationships with the needed gravity to create an impact that really resonates and isn't jarring or half baked simply aren't there and it's frustrating. This is how I feel and I enjoyed SP. I really feel sorry for those who were disappointed and thought the film was terrible because I understand how underwhelmed they must feel.
I think the majority of what Mendes feels he wants to articulate simply didn't translate onto the screen the way it should have nor the way he tries to convince himself and others that it did. I appreciate Mendes' contribution to the series but for both his movies he's had an incredible amount of preproduction time to really solidify a snazzy script but the end result for both have been comparatively lacklustre.
I'm not interested in a director waxing lyrical tryinh to be clever or after the fact overanalyzing the content of his movie and having not really delivered especially given the time and resources dedicated to the production. Mendes is done and the series really needs a new creative scribe and new director to take stewardship over the next Bond film.
What if he gets Bond 25? That would be.. interesting.
Screw it, call it Blofeld! Make the film specifically about Blofeld and Bond, in a very dramatic film. Get a writer and make it with heavy dialogue! Put them at a table with dinner!
You have Chris Corbould, a director now, who could handle the actions scenes and even the second unit! Give us a very dramatic film with Waltz and Craig and Seydoux to finish out Craig's era.
They could easily make up for the lack of backstory between Craig and Waltz with one dinner and some great dialogue in a dramatic setting.
Why am I okay with this?
SP was fun enough and it's got rewatch value, but it's mediocre at best imho, it definitely cost way too much, and we waited too long for it. We deserved more, and they will deliver with B25. I'm sure of it.
I will say this, Mendes isnt %100 responsible for all the films misdeeds. The producers & writers hold weight. Mendes can turn a mediocre script into a relatively good film.
The only reason Id want to see him do another one is if the script is a masterpiece.
The true test for Mendes IMO would have been for him to direct CR. That would have been interesting.
The scenes with Q in it were among the most entertaining ones and they did not feel out of place. Q needs to stay on, as does M. Moneypenny not so much. It is nice to know now how that personal relationship with Bond developed, which was never explained in the Connery films, but now that that's settled, I think it would be OK to leave her behind the desk.
It would have been four hours long with underwhelming action sequences and annoying subplots diverting from the main story, no thank you. Mendes had two chances and he didn't match CR with either. He crapped on the reboot with SF and crapped on the Bond universe with SP. He said he's done and that's a good thing. And mind you I liked SF and even more so SP, but he isn't right for JB and that's apparent in the individual films and treatment of the series.
To describe it as lazy is itself lazy.
It certainly wasn't lazy, as they killed themselves over getting it right.
So calling it lazy isn't doing them justice, even if someone dislikes the film or wants to know, why the "errors" are there. IMO, they got so caught up in their own ideas (Mendes and DC), that it would have been good, if someone would have brought up the differences between their ideas and the actual execution.
All in all, I still believe, this is the film, they wanted and giving it a bit more depth would have made the difference between good and great.
To go from Bond-lite to uber-Bond in the space of two films is just too much. I think they needed at least a shade of grey in the middle to build up to SP and all it's Bondiness. It feels a bit forced and desperate to drop it on us all at once like that.
I'm getting a bit tired of you actually. No matter how civilised you are in your comments...no matter how objective your comments may sound, it's that constant "but" that starts to irritate me. And before the "but" you mention the positives, which is followed after the "but" by huge sermons that are mostly negative.
Obviously, it's your personal opinion, and I appreciate it. But please take things into perspective. "SPECTRE" is no "DAD". "SPECTRE" is no "TMWTGG". "SPECTRE" is no "DAF" or "AVTAK". And at times it sounds like that is actually the case. That "SPECTRE" isn't in your TOP 10 of best Bond films (and I believe you have the film in your TOP 10 at #9 or #10), but firm at the Bottom 5 of worst Bond films.
If we apply your standards on Bond films, then I think you will be equally disappointed in Bond #25, Bond #26, etc. People have accused me many times of "expecting too much". Box office-wise, quality-wise. But I still frikkin' enjoy it! And therefore it really would help the atmosphere, even the objectivity in here, if you start stating the negatives before your famous "but"s, followed by the positives right after it.