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
Post of the year. =D>
Nobody is smug whilst defending Rogers use of stuntdoubles, or Brosnans pain face, either you are able to poke fun at those aspects, or they just don't bother you. It can be aggravating when it seems that absolute everything to be with Craigs entries, including some of the dodgy performance moments are retroactively viewed as some kind of bold, inspired choice by the filmmakers. Sometimes filmmakers just make gaffes, there's a lot of risk that goes along with creativity, and no one gets it right all the time. If SPECTRE had returned for Die Another Day and it turned out Bond and Blofeld were brothers I know many diehard Bond fans would be citing it as poor parody level writing, but because it happened during the Craig era it's suddenly a interesting take that perhaps wasn't given enough time in the oven to reach its potential? People lambast the love scene dialogue between Bond and Elektra/Paris for how hammy and melodramatic it is played, and call it poor, trite, soap opera level, but then legitimately become emotional over Craig's and Madelines soppy dialogue in B25 that sounds like a teenager wrote it.
First time I hear this. Even SP's biggest fans criticise the Brofield reveal, I've never seen anyone defend it ever since the movie came out.
Because he was looking for a “gotcha” moment. Otherwise he wouldn’t felt the need to single out my opinion and continue pushing back against it. So yeah I called that out.
For me a 'gotcha moment' is where person 1 is sort of lured into saying something by person 2, then person 2 reveals they'd set a bit of a trap for person 1 and person 1 has said something which undermines or contradicts their original point and made them look a bit silly. But that didn't happen here at all: BMB just said they disagreed with the idea that Bond films are nihilistic and then explained why, and there was no attempt made to make you contradict yourself- BMB didn't even ask you anything. No 'gotcha' at all.
Fatalism is 100% correct, yes. The character is so fatalistic. It's the crux of "The Spy Who Loved Me" (novel).
Good point. But Mendes4Lyfe won't answer, as he never does when he is proven wrong.
Pretty sure the interesting parts of DAD are...MR.
Proven wrong? No, I've made my point, anyone's got a right to have an opinion and they can express it. Sometimes I think people willfully misinterpret the point I'm making, and I'd rather not be drawn in by that. There's are sections to bad Bond films which removed from the context could have potential to be expanded upon. The opening to DAD is generally accepted as being one of these, as is the Cuba sequence in B25, especially the character of Paloma. However this has nothing to do with the point I was making, and is an attempt to pivot off-topic. What I'm saying is if you were to take Blofeld being Bond's brother or the character of Madeline Swann or Nomi and put them in a Brosnan film, diehard Bond fans would be able to point from a mile off and tell you that it's amateurish writing and a silly, stupid idea. Filmmaking is hard, often gaffes or errors of judgement are made, silly things get included that shouldn't etc. If Blofeld returned in DAD and was revealed to be Bond's brother and a little bit of piano music played as Brosnan said "huh?" Then even to this day we would all be howling and rolling about, saying how they could possibly include such an outragous nonesensical idea. It's just made me realise that people care much more about presentation than they do about the ideas themselves. People will tell you that they dislike the Moore and Brosnan (or, again, certain films) eras because they have amatuerish writing etc. But if they genuinely thought that then it would have just the same effect when it happens in the Craig era. In actual fact what bothers people and causes them to look down on one film and not the other is the presentation. Peirces films are presented as broad romps for the people in the cheap seats, whereas the Craig films are presented as sophisticated, artistic, explorations of character, (in other words, they have the right window-dressing) so people are more willing to overlook or get on board with bad writing even though the meat in the sausage is more or less the same stuff. I now realise its more about the form than the content for alot of people, and bad writing or sloppy storytelling isn't an issue as long as its presented under the right guise.
I suspect so but they'd never admit it.
Do you always turn your back on reality so it fits the narrative you're trying to pedal?
There are pages and pages and pages and pages devoted to the dislike of Brofeld from fans of Spectre and from non-fans; from fans of Craig, and non-fans. That's a fact. That's a reality. It's on this very site. It's all over the internet. It's arguably one of the biggest errors in the Craig era that's been discussed and largely agreed on amongst the Bond community (where even defenders will say that perhaps it wasn't executed in the best way).
It must be a pretty stressful life when one has to bend reality so one can feel "right".
SP was collateral damage and just might have turned out better had Pascal not been fired.
I think that Amazon chose Pascal to convince Barbara and Michael to sell. She is someone that they have trusted in the past. They probably also said, "Don't worry about Salke. We'll never let her anywhere near Bond."
If you were Pascal, where would you start? You'd look at CR and why that worked. I still think there's a good chance we get another version of MR for Bond 26. Its "enemy within" themes and wealthy industrialist plot might be tricky to pull off with Bezos, but they also speak to the times we are in.
CinemaCon starts tomorrow and I think we might get more Bond updates, maybe even a projected release date. At the very least some sort of thrown-together teaser.
Wouldn’t be so difficult to pull off if the heavy were based more off of Musk though - with his self landing rockets and the fact that he essentially bought his way into our government.
Musk is getting getting rid of unnecessary bureaucracy and wasteful spending.
https://www.lemonde.fr/en/economy/article/2025/02/27/elon-musk-s-empire-has-benefited-from-38-billion-in-contracts-and-government-aid_6738618_19.html
He'd make a good Drax. He certainly has the face for it.
Are you seriously suggesting The President should cancel all Space X contracts and basically put it out of business because Elon is helping out? Wow, if you think Musk entering the government is boosting Tesla I have a bridge to sell you.
I don't think you know what bait and switch means.
Regardless of one's opinions on governments spending is — the power of the purse lies in the Congress, and impoundment is not something the executive can do. Just because a bunch of sycophants in the legislature are willing to give up their power does not make it right. The basis of English law is the treasury in the hands of the legislature and not a mad king.
Debates about anything else are irrelevant. This is the widest subversion of the Republic since ratification. The foundation of the Constitution is gone.
Congress still handles the budget. This isn't hard. The executive branch controls the executive branch. He can decide how big each department needs to be and what they do. It's amazing how some of you have no Idea what you're talking about.
Musk is one of the reasons that BB called Amazon F*cking idiots. They basically told her to make a Bond movie with Musk. She told them she already had: it was called Tomorrow Never Dies. She also said she was somewhat sad about TND somewhat predicting the future. In today's crazy media world, I won't be surprised if Elliot Carver came back under Amazon's control.
Try again.