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
- it deals with issues relevant back then in the US (the growing threat of drugs).
-several of the supporting characters feel like are from the 80s (Kelifer, Pam, Della, Sanchez).
- the dialogue in places feels dated ("do you have a law against what they did to Leiter").
-The entire revenge setup fits into that era of 70s and 80s action films.
Would "I have a bad feeling about this" be better? :P
YES!
Yep. Love it the same. The Bond theme overused is excellent. Pierce is great.
Yeah absolute worst. Seemed like Binder was going through a camera fetish.
Was worried that this would diminish in light of me not loving SP (and one of the things I loved about SF was its set up for a traditional Bond film). Luckily that didn't happen. Outstanding stuff.
Severine is more sharply realized as a character, and far more nuanced and developed, in her minimal screentime than poor Swann is in well over an hour.
The gap in writing quality between the two films is astounding (on a pure character/dialogue level, mind you - not plot).
Craig is so, so, so good here too. He's playing a totally different Bond to the first two and I love it. Very Fleming. You can tell everyone was inspired and energetic and just giving it their all as opposed to the follow up which often felt tired and uninspired by contrast.
Top 10 Bond for me.
Looked at it differently; starts off with good intentions and there are some really good scenes in there; where it generally fails, for me, is the final 3rd when we get to Iceland. The poor cgi, the "Yo Momma" line, sigh..... But, overall, I really enjoyed this viewing.
You'd still want the face off / cat and mouse game between Bond and Scaramanga, right? Just take out the plotty stuff.
Also, Britt Ecklund's rump is lame, and I'll never understand why people cite it as a highlight of the film. Sure, she's in a bikini, but her figure leaves much to be desired (ducks before everyone comes in brandishing flamethrowers because I'm "objectifying" her). I've talked endless shit about Connery's figure in DAF, so there's no gender bias here.
I love that movie and i think your rise its because of Spectre.
I think Spectre will make people see Die another day in a better light because they are similar films.
Their plots are different but both films are more a celebration to the franchise than your regular Bobd adventure. ,Maybe thats why their scrpits are not that great.
They wanted to focus on the homages and the nostalgia over a good script. They can always make a well thought Bond adventure but very few times they can celebrate the succes of the franchise.
These is why i loved both films Spectre and Die Another DY they are a huge Bond spectacle celebration with great chases, great fun and a big budget film.
Everything is big about those films and with a great from their respective Bobd actors which make me love them.
The only thing better in Spectre is the DB-5 at the end. Die Another should have gotten it but at least they gave Bond an Aston Martin with the ejector seat lol
I will never wash this egg from my face. 8-|
It does justice for the QoS storyline!!!!!
It's cinematography in the desert is very reminiscent of QoS including the scene where Bond and Mr. White's daughter depart the train and enter Blofeld's campus.....reminds audiences of the Chilean desert and end scene with Camille at the train station.
Yay!!! Yeah I loved watching the Blu-Ray; my best experience as well.
Its funny how many similarities i found between both films, more than just homages and nods to past films here are the similarities i found
The tittles sequence has the same somber look, dark colors, some siluetes dancing and show us Bond much more clearly and in motion than any other titles sequences.
In Spectre Bond has been suspended because of what happened in Mexico while in Die another day Bond looses his 00 status so both have to work on their own at the beginning.
Both films Get more light hearted as the movie advances.
In both films we see an infiltrated villain inside Mi6 in Spectre its C while in Die another day is Miranda frost.
Now in both films the main villain fakes his death and changes his name Franz overhouser to Ernst Stavro Blofeld and Coronel Moon to Gustave Graves and lets not forget both killed thrir oen father since he didn't approve their attitudes.
Both films had a great Villain lair the differences were the settings. Spectre was in the dessert while The Ice palace was on a snowy setting.
I really like Both films very much but my winnner by a hair was Die Another day because Pierce felt more comfortable in this type of Bond movie but Craig did a very fine job too after, all Spectre is the film which made him go up to my top 3 Bond actors.
is it soaring up your rankings?
I'll add Bond being tortured as well, although the timing was different. Let's also not forget a fancy Jaguar chasing an even fancier Aston around.
The daddy issues you mentioned - now that is an interesting coincidence.
I think they were both intentional since Spectre is Noding a lot of the past films but it has some coincidence because when i watched Die Another day I felt at moments that i was playing Spectre again because of the tone of the films starting a little dark and getting lighher as the film goes on and i think that was something not planned.
My reminder that i was watching Die another day were the more fantasy elements like DNA changing, the Invisible car and Graves suit at the end.
If it wasn't for it and the cast you could feel like you are watching the same film.
Today at afternoon ill watch Skyfall and the world is not enough and my experience.
So the last few Brosnan films do indeed have similarities with the last two Craig films, although the Craig films are definitely deeper thematically and more polished, in my view.
Also, they are much darker in tone. Having said that, there is a notable change in tone between TWINE & DAD (with the latter being much lighter) and I feel the same about SF to SP. The same goes for the Bond actor's portrayal.
Spectre does have more depth since it keeps going more into Bond's past but im not sure if i agree about more polished maybe You feel so because spectre left out the more fantasy elements but i die Another die was a very nice film to look at and it looked very polished to me.
i agree on the change of Tone from The world is not enough- DAD and from Skyfall to Spectre.
My high level thoughts: I started out glued to my chair. I was riveted during the opening sequence and for most of the earlier part of the film. By the end, I was so bored, that I turned it off before the final scene when Bond goes back to MI6 for the Aston - so I actually shut it off before that epilogue sequence.
Things I noticed:
The yellow colour is not on screen all the time. It's noticeably missing during the M opening office scene, during Tanner & Bond's boat ride on the Thames & in the opening Italy scenes. The film is much better for it.
The song remains unbearable for me. I endured it to see Kleinman's title sequence, but I realize that I should have made good on my threat and just muted the damn thing. What mess.
The score was much better than I remembered it. For the most part I really enjoyed it, including the opening bars during the Columbia lady sequence before the gunbarrel. I particularly like the ambient mood setting sounds which Newman uses throughout, which are quite unique. I really loved the score during the boat ride to White's & the use of Nisi Dominus IV (Vivaldi) during the Lucia assassination scene at the house. Newman's work here is much ‘lower key’ than what he did for SF. Much more muted compared to the previous film, which was noticeably more dynamic, but that mirrors the film, which is also less expressive than its predecessor.
Newman as an artist just scored what he saw on the screen. I can’t blame him for that. The only place where it’s very tiresome is in the ending sequence in London where it goes on and on and becomes very noisy and distracting during the MI6 building destruction and boat ride.
The reason for White switching sides was very weak. “Women, children!” Yeah right. As if White gives a hoot about that. Unless the threat was to his own wife and child, in which case it makes sense.
I realize now that the film works very well and is actually almost brilliant, until the Clinic. The Madeline intro scene is a very poor one. She doesn’t stand up to shake his hand. Doesn’t look at him while talking to him at the start. They just get into this rather deep conversation about his psych evaluation out of nowhere. It’s not credible. That is not how such a sequence would develop in real life. It looks like a rehearsal. They have absolutely no chemistry. This has been stated before by others, and it's true. None whatsoever. It kills the mood.
Up to this point, SP was shaping up nicely for me, but from the clinic onwards it slips. I still can tolerate it. L’Americaine is very good (if terribly slow) and the train sequence is alright (with an excellent fight). So is the wait for the Rolls, and the early parts of the Blofeld lair sequence (see below). Everything after that however - just delete it.....PLEASE!
This is a film that tries to cram way too much in. There are too many half baked scenes (Blofeld lair and backstory, C takedown finale, Bond/M car accident, MI6 Madeline capture) everywhere after the half way point. In that respect, it is a definite case of more is less, while SF in contrast is a case of less is more. This is quantity over quality rather than the previous film's quality over quantity.
Lea Seydoux doesn’t work for me in this film at all. She was magnificent in her small generally mute role in MI-GP, but there’s something about her here that is very ‘off’. I am quite certain that if they had cast someone else in the role of Madeline, this film would have been a better experience for me. The way she delivers her lines screams cheap Euro Trash film and not classy Bond film to me, and reminds me of those villains & heroines in the Transporter films. She is definitely a weak link in this film and it's not because of the way her character is written - it's in her performance.
Craig is very good though. I misread his performance on earlier viewings. I prefer his intensity in the previous three outings, but there's nothing wrong with him here.
Waltz is ok. Not very memorable and poorly written, but he does the best he can with what he's given. It's not his fault.
I think I understand now why this film didn’t work so well in China or the US (relatively speaking) but did good business in Europe. It is kind of European in flavour. I’m not talking about locations or jokes. I’m talking about ‘feel’. It's similar to some of the Euro thrillers (that cold, dark, bluish, grayish hue) I’ve seen (like The International or Ghost Writer, both of which I like), and English tv serials, which are usually less colourful and more gray than their American counterparts, due to weather mainly. It's a cold aesthetic. A distinctly unglamorous one. The acting is also more like that. Less expressive.
The film also has a 70’s thriller feel to it in places. The pace is quite slow and deliberate in places (L'Americaine). Definitely more mellow than what North American and possibly Asian audiences are used to, and normally prefer. Even the torture sequence sort of has that 70's style to it. I can’t put my finger on it. I’m thinking Marathon Man ("is it safe?") or The Shining. I get the impression Mendes was channeling some of his childhood favourites when making this film, and perhaps Craig was too. There is a ‘dated’ aspect to its style. While MI-RN & QoS are very much of the moment, and SF is a throwback to earlier Bonds aesthetically, SP feels like it’s from a different bygone era - not a Bond era mind you, but more of a Harry Palmer era imho.
As I said on another thread, I feel the film is lacking something. A charisma or charm or personality. Something is just not there. It’s what elevates a 'B' movie to 'A' movie status. A certain 'je ne sais quoi'. SF had it in spades - star quality. It’s what makes a film memorable & injects a passionate following in the viewer. This film actually reminds me of Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy (also lensed by Hoyte) and while I respect that film, I can't get too excited about it either.
Conclusion
I realize now that I will never love SP, but I don't hate it either. I can tolerate it and appreciate the quality photography, money on the screen and expansiveness of it. However, I’d truly rather just forget it and move on. As if it never existed. As if Craig’s era ended (if it indeed has ended) with that marvelous ending office scene in SF which promised much more.
Best scenes:
-funeral with Lucia
-White meeting
-Opening tracking shot
-Bond and Lucia at her house (I have come round to this scene now). I didn't like it in the theatre
-the scenes where Bond and Madeline arive at Blofeld's lair, go to their respective rooms, and the meteor scene. Only up to here though. I don’t like anything after that including the control room.
-the Hinx fight on the train. I couldn’t get into it in the theatre but I now have come round to it. Very visceral and one can feel Bond in danger. Newman's scoring here is excellent as well. Very ominous
Worst performance:
Andrew Scott – definitely. C is useless. I honestly think he is worse than Elvis. What a ponce.
Nice write up @Bondjames The song is trash. When the music fades out and Smith tries to do that falsetto it's like nails on a chalkboard. Makes me wanna' commit suicide.