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
\m/
Agreed... total awesome experience
You mean that this was never explained in the movie? What a disappointment and if so, how the hell does this film tie the previous entries together then? Don't answer that. It's just a rhetorical question. ;) The first question can be explained though if anyone so desires.
Summarizes perfectly the best of both sides of the SP reviews. Concluded in another thread that people who like SP are judging it on a different basis. Does the movie succeed in what it attempts to do…rather than some objective standard (like in your first paragraph).
Great breakdown @DoctorNo
My only proper complaint is that it might be too much. There are so many ideas, so many heavy scenes, the film has practically three different potential endings. Its a lot to take in. Almost overkill...
Right now its a sure top five for me, possibly top three. Its that good! But I obviously need many more viewings of it. Which I am most definitely looking forward to! :D
How much explanation does that require? For me it was quite clear.
So is it clear in the film that Quantum was some sort of cover name for the real name of the organisation? If you want to answer in spoiler tags then this would be cool. :)
You know, I think I'll watch DAD before I see this film. Then, I'm bound to appreciate some of it. ;)
That's it, but I think it was quite clear, wasn't it?
I thought so. I don't know how anyone was able to miss it as I thought it was conveyed well but apparently not everyone caught on.
Anyway, overall I was slightly disappointed for two major reasons -
1. Some of the action was pretty average/almost boring (eg. the car chase)
2. I've had it with Mendes' "tributes" to other Bond films throughout his films. It was a fair enough little quirk of SF being the 50th anniversary but to do it again right through SPECTRE was very irritating.
Pros -
The opening sequence
Craig
Wishaw
Fiennes
Bautista as Hinx
Waltz
Good strong Bond Girl character
Fight on the train
Oberhauser's 3 minute challenge
Cons-
Terrible theme song
Car chase (aside from humorous bit in the middle)
Poor actress playing the strong Bond girl
The one liners or lack of them
All that snow and no Bond ski action
Craig's Bond falling for the Bond girl..... again!!
Too much scene stealing from other films of the series
I felt it was a mixed bag but still enjoyable. It wouldn't quite make my top 10 films on first watch though, I have SF and CR 5th and 6th overall. I still hope it grows on me with further viewing.
What??? Lea Seydoux did what she could in the role she was given, she is an amazing actress!! Maybe it was just poor choice of words, if the writers had given her more to chew on, this might have changed your opinion but Lea is a proven actress.
Sorry I just wanted to give my two cents lol
...well add another quarter. I think Seydoux did fine regardless of how you judge the material.
;)
Her acting is nuanced to the smallest level possible, her gestures, facial expression, voice, body language. Also her dialogue is well though out.
Best Bond girls in no order -
Claudine Auger
Luciana Paluzzi
Diana Rigg
Jane Seymour
Carole Bouquet
Carey Lowell
Sophie Marceau
Eva Green
Seydoux was far from Denise Richards but never amongst the best.
What the film lacks though,. imho.. is the 'spark' that characterizes the best of them.
That sense of playfulness/twinkle from the supporting cast is missing. Only DC showcases it, and he, imho, saves SP as a result.
No bondjames she was golden :))
As was everything in the film I noticed..... I think it was to cover up the CGI (not sure) but it was pretty evident throughout.
Yeah I agree with that. I thought Waltz & Seydoux did what they could with characters in Oberhouser & Swann that had very thin motivation for the actions they took in the film.
In regard to the whole Quantum/SPECTRE thing. I think it's fairly obvious that after getting the rights back to SPECTRE they just decided to ret-con SPECTRE into the events that Quantum was responsible for and didn't really bother to explain much of a link between them. As a fan who wanted to see a conclusion of the Quantum storyline I guess I'm happy that they gave it a mention, but in the end they didn't really bother to flesh out that aspect of the storyline. Less of a plot hole, and more of them just kind of expecting fans to go along with it one way or another.
Very true.
I once saw an interview with Brent Spiner (Data on ST) and he said: "A good actor can elevate a bad script slightly, but a good script he can fly with."
Such is true here. I have no doubts about Léa Seydoux as an actress, but in SP, she wasn't given a great deal of good material to work with. On the other hand, Eva Green absolutely flew with the CR material (if you forget the "little finger" scene).
Music in the first scene sounds like in Dr. No' opening title :). But SP has too many references to earlier Bonds and SP music has too many references to SF music (in the key moments !?). I don't understand why, there is no anniversary. Why we didn't even learn what means the SPECTRE acronym? Also imo SP is the most emotionally uneven Bond movie, e.g. during car race Bond shouldn't be so relaxed.
Character played by Lea Seydoux sometimes remind me Irma Bunt.