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
You wont get on here with people with that attitude. In your opinion, I did not like the twist away from the prior three films with the direction they took with SPECTRE, but I enjoyed it for what it is and appreciate what my fellow Bond fans would enjoy about it. A majority of posts are of fans loving the film, the critics a majority of which love it. So why change things to suit you and your anger towards it. You say fresh blood, Michaels two young Sons have worked on SF and now SPECTRE. Gregg looks a dead cert to take over his auntie Barbara one day as head of EON and the same family who have looked after this franchise for over 50 years will continue to do so, and I welcome that. You always have the option of just not going to see the next film.
Subliminal messaging.
I actually thought that was a let-down.
After such a long abscene of Alpine action in 007-land the snow plane thing left me underwhelmed (the lack of proper soundtrack is partly to blame) - and the whole sequence was crying out for some local flavour, with perhaps some skiing or at least have the plane & 4x4 cars end up on a ski-piste or smth, instead of a deserted mountainside village...
As Mendes has said and everyone can see, SP is clearly not SF2. Its tone is completely different and, by implication and action, DCs Bond (to me at least) is a very different person. He has a cockiness, assurance and humour that simply was not there in SF and this fits in with the overall different tone. Now, considering that: SF was a massive success, the timeline is very close (weeks I am guessing) and wider audiences tend to be lazy in knowing what they like: is this the first time that a Bond movie has changed in tone so directly from one movie to another (especially within the same time line and the same cast and Director). DAF was very different from previous SC movies but obviously there was a break and culture had moved on etc.
Its just a thought but, when the dust settles, will the change of tone be considered a wise choice or should the DC Bond we saw and enjoyed (as a mass audience) have re-appeared in SP? And did the writers and Director make this decision for artistic reasons rather than a commercial decision of giving the punters more of what they obviously want? Are we looking at "second album syndrome". If SF was "Rumours" , will SP turn out to be "Tusk"?
It really was crying out for Ski Scene, or even using one of the aeroplane doors as a sledge. After all SPECTRE is all about Homage it would have been a tip of the hat to the Cello from TLD.
A majority can still be wrong, look at religious people. Anyway, I wouldn't consider the offspring of the current producers to be fresh blood.
I still liked Craig's Moore-esque salute to Hinx when the plane lines up with the car before switching to a sterner face and proceeding to shoot at him.
I agree, I would've liked to see some skiing, especially after they talk about how Hannes Oberhauser taught Bond to skii. I of course was hoping for some OHMSS theme thanks to the trailer lol
Seeing Bond ski would have really hacked off Franz\Blofeld!
On the board two minutes and you've made comments about black lesbians and religious people. My goodness man behave yourself.
I agree. This is the next logical step.
Well, I've been a fan of Bond films for many, many years. I can (just) remember Roger Moore taking over the role. The films have been my obsession for all of my life, and I have seen them all more times than I can remember.
And yet I have read some of Flemings books once, and a handful twice. I can take them or leave them. So where do I fit into your idea of a Bond fan?
I'm appreciative of the source material and keeping Bond roughly as Fleming wrote him, but audiences today have no idea who Fleming is. So the fact Eon still go back to Fleming whenever they are stuck is surely testament to their high regard for the man. If BB and her family gave up the rights to Bond then who would take over? I will tell you now, it would be someone who wouldn't give two figs about Ian Fleming or his heavily plundered books. Bond films would turn into F&F clones.
In fact Barbara, by creating CR and everything that has come since has more regard for Fleming than her father did with some of his later films.
So, just remember that as years go by it's harder to relate the films to the gentleman spy of the 1950s, and Barbara Broccoli does her level best to be respectful to that past. More so than anyone else would, that's for sure.
I would probably still accept that over Elba =))
Well put and hear hear.
I also think that a fight atop Big ben after Mi6 went down would have been more memorable than bringing down the helicopter with a Walther PPK. Imagine if Bloefeld had just flown off not following the river!
Well said that man. I tire of those people who downcry Barbara Broccoli and say she's letting her father's (and Fleming's) legacy down.
She took a huge gamble with Craig and the reboot but both artistically and financially it has paid off. With SPECTRE we've got a slight return to older films, there is a little bit of fun in the first hour or so for long time fans, but it's still a traditional Craig film as it races home to a conclusion. I think they've balanced the styles quite well.
Pretty self deprecating, considering his ears.
Oh yes give me Spectre over anything Cubby did post Saltzman.
That's just it. I don't wish to trash Cubby by any means but he always struck me as the money man whereas Saltzman seemed to have more creative input over the earlier films - even if it was not liking most things!
Knew what he was doing.Although guys if you have a spare $300 mill
Sitting about, please show the rest of us how it should have been done ? :D
As I said I'm not trashing him at all but I think Saltzman and Babs need some kudos too. Saltzman certainly needed Cubby to bank roll him.
They were better together. But Saltzman was a disaster with money. That was his downfall.
Problem is I don't own the rights.... =))
Never mind, I think the rights to the man from uncle will be going
Cheap, you can re make them. ;)
A very lucid & intelligent point.
He clearly is. He's not moping about and he happily seduces Lucia without a second thought. Upon first meeting her he makes a joke about life insurance and tells her casually that she doesn't look like a grieving widow. This is a man demonstrating he has a duty to his job but will amuse himself in the process.
I get that because Craig's Bond for the most part centres on his character arc being shaped into a fully formed experienced pro. That includes the hardships and lessons learned that cultivate the man into later being the man most men want to be and Craig achieved that status effortlessly in SP.
Perpetually? No. He was fine for the most part in CR. QoS was understandable and even then to say he lacked warmth and charm is being disingenuous. Bond's interactions with Mathis and Cammille testify to that. SF Bond had his grievances but he was a lot less moody and angry than he could and probably should have been. You and others really play up this angry attitude that Bond supposedly has when it's not the case at all. That being said I don't want nor need Bond smirking and winking all the time to suggest he's "in a good mood". Pay attention to the details and nuances in tge acting, body language and expressions.
These are harsher times that deal with much more serious threats that also reflect what's going on in our own society. I don't want Bond pallying about with the villain who just blew up an underground train. The 7/7 attack on London was a big deal and as such, villains and scumbag villains of tgat nature need to be dealt with hostility. It's credible and just in an ideal world.
Why because he deliberately missed killing Kara or wanted to avenge Felixstowe and Della? Again, I think you're missing or just not wanting to see the human empathy Craig has displayed in his movies. Craig in CR alone conveyed this moreso than Dalton did in his 2 movies.
I really don't agree with this at all. Bond unlikable and a prick in SP? Wow. Regardless, Bond isn't supposed to be a positive hero. SP alone makes a big deal about him being an assassin. Bond isn't a hero or role model. He's the guy that does the dirty work for his government while abusing alcohol, sleeping with multiple women and many other vices. He's not a conventional nice guy so I don't really see what the problem is. If you're looking for "Captain America", you won't find him in Bond.
It is a good point, but Logan was only new to Skyfall he was the "fresh eyes" the problem was his script was so far away from Bond that P&W had t be brought in to inject some Bond in to it. Then with Spectre you have Logan with P&W and then for humour you have Jez Buttersworth too many cooks spoil the broth. IMO if Logan can not produce a good story for Bond on his own he is not the right man for the job there are plenty of talented writers who are Bond fans out there.