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
Yes, and then there is the superb FYEO-like dangling vehicle moment when a trapped Ash says to Bond: "Help me out here, brother." But Bond responds, "I had a brother, his name was Felix Leiter."
And that was completely satisfying - on multiple levels, not least in succinctly consigning any significance of "Bro-feld" to the dustbin. Though it may also remind us, inappropriately, of the humorous "I had a brother once" line from DAF, which can't have been intended.
Granted, my friends and I also joked that now Mathilde can grow up and be the new Bond (but we weren't being serious, of course).
I don't see how you could read the words 'James Bond Will Return' and think the beloved character is being replaced.
Haha. If we had an awards system, take my award :D.
BTW, hello @mtm surprised you're a bit late to the party! Don't think I've seen you in here before today.
Hello; yeah I had to wait a hugely long time to see it! :)
That's interesting, the introvert/extrovert dichotomy. But I think you're right, Madeleine is an introvert of a kind, not dynamic, a psychotherapist (of course) who was taught to hide as a child, just as she has passed on the same survival skills to her daughter. It's almost as if that "hiding" aspect has formed a necessary part of Madeleine's core being (as in, she's always hiding, to some extent), and was literally in hiding when Bond found her in the Hoffler Clinic), and that's all reflected in a kind of constantly cool impassivity that so many fans (not me) find frustrating in her character. Yet Madeleine is someone who doesn’t want to attract attention. But, of course, Lea Seydoux is acting-up a storm, as it were, even when - or especially when - her character is not communicating anything verbally. Her face is so expressive she almost doesn't need to say anything at all.
"Bunga Bunga"
Oh, yeah ... it's notorious. And I understood exactly what Bond meant when he uttered it.
Indeed - although, that's part of CraigBond's appeal for me, tbh!
Haha, yeah posting at 2 am after a long day isn't ideal to properly express one's thoughts ;)
I'll admit I haven't really followed Bond news and murmurs recently so an came in to this movie without any kind of expectations other than seeing a good movie for Craig's last outing. In a sense I didn't see it with hardcore bond fan eyes like I had in the past, so I could compare my state of mind to a lot of people in the audience who sees a Bond flick on opening weekend, Bond fans for sure though. I think that the general concensus amongst viewers was that the movie was very enjoyable but the ending was a shock. Leaving your fanbase confused isn't ideal, many were visibly upset and frustrated. Personally my frustration wasn't about the possibility of the continuation of the franchise without Bond but in the fact that Bond's death was just cowardice. He didn't sacrifice himself as a necessity to open defective "blast doors" or something like that, he could have left but decided not too. He could have lived his life and see his daughter grow-up from a distance. It just didn't feel like something he'd do, to me at least. It didn't need to be a "happy ever after" story either, it seemed to just be a death just for the sake of it and left a bad taste in my mouth. As much as I enjoyed the entire Craig run, the emotional roller coaster with Swann and Mathilde, I certainly would have preferred a different conclusion. But yes I did enjoy Craig's last hurrah.
Going back to discussions and reactions from other viewer after the flick, the main confusion was about the death of the character and where the franchise was going. I discussed this with a couple I had talked to before the flick and the lad was basically saying he was done with Bond if the series was going to continue without Bond. It seems like a plausible reaction for many fans. No doubt many fans assume there is going to be another reboot and with such an ending there's not much of a choice. I like to see the entire Connery to Brosnan as a single imperfect timeline, Craig's is certainly on its own, I would have prefered the new Bond to not need yet another reboot.
Nice to see you too willy!
I suppose it depends on where the story goes as they say. With a death ending like this you kinda have to see Craig's timeline as just one of multiple Bond timelines amongst others rather than something set in stone that the other flicks would have to deal with in a way, that this is Bond's end and anything the next Bond actor does is in Craig's past all leading to his end. It's a bit weird.
Oh, come on. "Morally unjustifiable?" Sorry to knock you off your high horse, but: James Bond is a fictional character. Creating a popular fiction is nothing more or less than telling an entertaining lie. You "genuinely don't believe Bond is dead"? Good. Neither do I -- because I never "genuinely believed" that Bond was alive. You don't like the film? Fine, that's totally your prerogative. You want to accuse Daniel Craig or Barbara Broccoli of any sort of crime? Please. Get over yourself. The only crime they've committed is inventing a fiction that you personally dislike.
I suppose they never mentioned Vesper in any films leading up to CR so it may be a non issue. But it isn’t exactly unprecedented; Tracy was brought up in the Moore and Dalton eras.
But after the Craig era, are films like that going to be enough to meet the high bar set by the Craig era for a majority of audiences (not talking about our niche group of Bond fans here)? Hard to say.
It’ll be a long time before they sort out what to do with the franchise I think, and a long time until we get another movie.
For example, maybe they'll want to explore his military background more going forward. Not to the point where we spend a whole film seeing it, but just how that could affect a James Bond in the world we currently live in, rather than exploring how losing a loved one can affect him.
Dr No had him meet Felix for the first time, and had his first tangle with Spectre which ran through the next six films or so (and actually had the antagonists in the next film take revenge over). Those films were less standalone than the ones which came later.
I seriously think we need a one-two punch of proper LALD and MR adaptations. Or do MR first I guess but if that's gonna be the first one then he should probably end up with Gala Brand at the end of the movie.
I just had that thought as well; maybe some good proper adaptions are what’s needed.
Good point, but I think the films are always going to have recurring characters like Felix and the Whitehall brigade, and I wouldn’t say it affects their stand-alone status. Similarly with having an overarching criminal organization with whom Bond continually butts heads. DN, GF, FRWL are interchangeable in a way CR and QOS, SP and NTTD are not. IMO of course.
Thank you!
But there's ALWAYS a confusion in the public. People think James Bond is a codename, they don't know it was first a series of novel, etc. Heck, I'm sure you can find a few people thinking James Bond is a British spy stealing from the rich to give to the poor, living at 221B Baker Street and who got his 00 status by pulling a sword from a stone.
Pros:
-The movie is colorful! Lovely cinematography all around
-The PTS was nice and intense. Not as good as Skyfall or Casino Royale’s but I dug it quite a bit.
-I enjoyed the title sequence as well, apart from the dull section where he’s just showing faces again.
-the movie up through the Cuba section is a lot of fun. It really feels like classic Bond to me. Lovely locations, playful humor but not too silly (Waldo aside) and some decent action.
-Sound design is really good. The explosion impacting Bond’s hearing, the growling engines in the Norwegian woods, the crash of the waves at Safin’s base. A lot of really cool stuff.
-The square scene with the DB5 and the one take stairwell sequence are very solid action scenes.
-Safin’s base is super cool.
-The retuning players from Spectre give better performances.
-The score was really good. I liked it listening to it isolated but it works even better in context. Not as good as Arnold’s stuff but I preferred it to Newman’s.
-Paloma was a fun character
-Craig was good, even if he sounded like he wasn’t using the same accent as the previous films.
Con’s:
-M being a total incompetent, and the fight he had with Bond was odd.
-Everything in London was more or less awful. Just gobs and gobs of exposition that killed the movie’s pace in its tracks.
-Waldo’s poor comedic relief was grating. I did like his death though.
-The henchman was disappointing. Didn’t do anything memorable and I don’t think we even got his name. Ash was given more to do than he was.
-Most of the action was thoroughly unremarkable.
-Safin was completely bungled. They had him give a whole villain speech and he still couldn’t explain what he was doing or why.
-The stuff with Bond’s daughter and his death and the very ending was wayyyyy too sentimental. Cloying music, tearful dialogue. C’mon, we don’t need this sort of ham in a Bond film.
-The story was trying to do WAY too much, and ended up just being totally muddled by the end of it. They should have had a much simpler narrative, and just shouldn’t have even bothered connecting it to Spectre.
Overall very mixed on the film, a lot more negative than positive feelings right now unfortunately. I think I liked it more than Spectre but not by much which is surprising to me.
Three times in the novels, out of 13, and two of those near the end, when Fleming was becoming bored with the character and deliberately experimenting.
Once in the movies, out of 20, pre Craig.
Not 5 out of 5, as with Craig-Bond.
And I disagree with you that Bond goes rogue in nearly every single Bond story
I'm not against the occasional splash of character development in Bond's life, but having a personal emotional crisis in every single movie is too rich for my blood
IMO in the past Bond may have been an emotional character, but Craig-Bond has turned him into a melodramatic one, which ain't my cup of meat.
The difference in the novels is that he doesn't quit his job and run off every time. He has moments of doubt and reflection, but most of the time he enjoys what he is doing for a living and trusts and believes in those he works for. With Craig-Bond, he seems so miserable most of the time, I wonder why he ever became a secret agent in the first place
Same here. I like the loner Bond.