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
Not sure if you caught the irony of your comment.
This.
I, too, am sorry to see @peter go. I hope he returns soon.
Sane voices are too frequently and predictably savaged on this particular forum, and usually by the same 2 or 3 members who seem to resent anyone who might have a deeper understanding of the filmmaking process (after all we are discussing Bond films on this site) and, therefore, a reasonable grasp of what might really be going on re: Eon and Bond. It's a shame because there are many members here who are open minded, articulate, have interesting opinions to share and discuss, and who are respectful to others, unfortunately they are all too often ignored or belittled -- or their words/posts are twisted out of shape.
Before I sign off, I'll say this; Bond 25 is aiming to keep it's release dates. Craig is committed. They are zeroing in on mostly fresh up-and-coming directors - and, yes, before a certain member chimes in, I know this is nothing new, but I will confirm it is what is going on. And I personally think Craig is the best thing to happen to the Bond franchise since Connery. He's made Bond his own and given the character a depth and inner life (internal conflict, which is very Fleming) which no other actor managed to do before. He's the best Bond since Connery. Just saying.
Mendes.
The fact (ibid) that pre-production including set-building is continuing is on the one hand encouraging, since it suggests that there's a fairly firm script in place. But no director still? Surely whoever gets hired will want some input into things, which might me undoing the pre-production work.
Good lord I'm glad I don't own shares in these productions . . . I'd be losing sleep.
It's getting good reviews
https://www.thewrap.com/white-boy-rick-film-review-gritty-poignant-drama-portrait-teenager-corrupted/
https://www.screendaily.com/reviews/white-boy-rick-toronto-review/5132431.article
As @Mendes4Lyfe I liked Craig in CR as it was noticeably different, and QoS as it picks up where CR left. But there’s no hiding that his character have always been "in a bad way" – which of course suits Craig. But when they try to take a slightly lighter approach with SP, he just doesn’t sell Bond at all to me.
I don’t agree with @Shardlake that Craig’s acting is too subtle to pick up for some. I’m fully aware of his nuanced acting, and I would never outright criticize him as an actor, he just hasn’t sold his performances as Bond to me, as previous actors have before him. Brosnan might be a lesser actor, but his charming portrayal makes me revisit his films far more often than Craig’s.
That’s not to say I don’t in any way look forward to Bond 25. If they indeed go for a lesser-known director, that’s one thing I really look forward to seeing, because it will be an element of uncertainty - what will he/she bring to the table, how will he/she take on action pieces, character building scenes, etc.? I think a younger director – hungry for taking on a bigger franchise, can be refreshing. There are plenty of examples of up-and-coming directors delivering "raw", intriguing films, and it’s that I hope EON will tap into.
A reassuring voice as always.
What's interesting about Demange is that they were talking with him way back, and he was considered a front runner. Yet they seemed to prioritize Villeneuve and then Boyle. Now Boyle is out, and he is a front runner again, but once more they seem to be considering other directors. I wonder if it might slip through his hands once again, and if so there must be something about him which makes them hesitant - experience most likely.
A lot of the upswing in MI has been the focus upon high octane stunts and action, largely performed by Cruise. I don't think any other series will be able to (or should try to) match this.
I don't think Bond should ever be all out action anyway. So they need to concentrate on what makes Bond a different and unique series, and do that to the absolute best.
The voice of sanity!
Understand fully why Peter has left. I dip into this to get some news on Bond 25, and am delighted to hear it's still going to happen and that Craig is to star! I tend now to flip through and avoid reading certain posters who are just churning out same junk to get some proper info on the next James Bond movie which is what this thread is supposed to be about??
See for me, I think Craig can do light easily and exceptionally well. Look at his performance in Layer Cake or even in CR for the most part. Really pay attention to his performance in CR and you'll see he plays it somewhat light for the majority of the film but the lightness is measured and kept in check, avoiding spilling over into obnoxiousness as was the case for SP. Furthermore his performance was balanced with the dark reality of the actual job if a spy/assassin....which Beeper even comments on "you can switch off so easily".
Despite all the insane running, jumping and killing CraigBond was in a pretty playful mood until the woman screwed him over.
Brosnan had his weaknesses which are well known, but there's no question the guy looked like he was giving it his best every time. The issue there was that it wasn't good enough. Craig has it in him, but he completely misread how his approach would appear on screen to some viewers (including myself). I expected far more from him. I think he knows it too, which is why he wants to come back. It's a bigger crime to lose prior ardent fans than it is to have never had them at all.
Thank you for your words @bondsum. You too have my friendship and fondness.
I'm actually considering a bit of hibernation myself, as there is to much vitriol on this thread. It's to bad we keep loosing valuable members like this over and over again throughout the years. But I've been here long enough to know it's always been like that. Fortunately, there will always be a lucid resistance that the good mods and owners of Mi6 can rely on to come back at one point or another. It's a shame because this is a brilliant site and it can be a brilliant community. I'm also at CBn, I never had a problem in saying that here. Both forums have been my home since, oh I don't know, 99 or something? I'll always be here in one capacity or another, even if just flying over a cuckoo's nest ;)
Cheers
As much as I don’t want to leave I feel fan forums are becoming too comicbooky if that makes sense the internet in general has people at each other’s throats of things that at the end of the day don’t matter... I don’t think I am gonna leave but I have been considering posting less..,
And if anyone wants to hear about the whackiness on one of my other forums pm me
I think Cruise achieved that with Fallout earlier this year. There are a few who don't like it, some who think it was alright and many who absolutely love it. I've not seen many (any?) who hate it though.
That's what they have to achieve with the next one. It's a tall task, but they can't have a polarizing entry imho. Not after SP.
That's exactly the point. He's terrific in CR, and balances the lightness in a measured way (the film itself is well-balanced). After "the woman screws him over", he's not the same Bond; it follows him throughout all his films, more or less. Of course this has been the intention, but after 4 films that's a bit much. In SP when they tried to up the humour, it felt like Craig wasn't at all comfortable with it, IMO.
As an example, I think OHMSS benefits from being Laz's standalone. As an audience we fully invest in the pain because it's the only film he's in. If Connery had done it, would we look at his Bond the same way we do now? Would it have impacted the way we see his earlier films, knowing the tortured narrative arc? I'm not so sure. Even today some fans say that Connery couldn't have played OHMSS, due to his indestructible and invulnerable nature in the other films. While I disagree, I can see where they're coming from. A portrayal defines an actor to a degree, and there's only so much one actor can do credibly and memorably within the context of a characterization.
Bond cannot suffer in every film and not every film can be about his inner torment. Sometimes he just has to be Bond, doing what he does best. I think perhaps it's easier to buy into that if there is no prior emotional baggage.
One issue that Craig has had is that CR defined his interpretation so vividly. Not just performance wise, but also narrative wise. They've been chasing it ever since.
Yes, he has said that on record, including alluding to Roger. He has also said that Bond's inner motivations are what he's interested in when it comes to the character.
I don't have a problem admitting when I'm wrong although my last spat was with a past member now banned due to creating two accounts and deliberately being an excrement stirrer.
Some of you gullible lot fell for his BS, looking back on all the fawning over jasonbond006 and is alter ego andre makes me want to reach for the sick bucket. So some of your judges of character I question and also the ability not be able to see a bare faced liar when you see one.
Looking back over the rubbish those 2 used to spout and the way it was lapped up, I'm not even sure if he was ever a Soldier and even if he was is that the behaviour of someone who is given the responsibilty that he supposedly had?
Yet people will fawn over a narcissistic attention seeker like that yet treat the likes of @ColonelSun, @peter & @RC7 with contempt and distrust.
Certain members here have nowhere the knowledge they present and likely pour over the internet looking for things to impress others with, they appear to live in a bubble of MI6 and treat it like Twitter, the amount some post I can't see how they can have much of a life outside of the forum.
The upshot of that is they think they have a rule over the forum and like to shout others down, there is an element of jealousy here. They'd love to have the knowledge that our fellow posters who are genuinely part of the industry have and because they can't add anything that tops those people's measured, generous and informed posts they attack it and call it into question as sitting in your mothers basement tapping away at your keyboard is a lonely place and when you've constructed a life around a Bond forum and someone comes along that clearly knows more than you and it doesn't truck with your constructed view of things you attack it.
You can tell those that have stood on the shoulders of others who've done the work and presented it here to get a verbal handjob of those that lap it up and those that are genuinely informed.
Yes of course we get passionate and disagree but there is a point when you have to realise that you are just a fan and are getting your knowledge from the internet when there are those here that genuinely know what they are talking about and don't have to but choose to enlighten us with their insight into the process.
No one here is entitled to be here more than the next person and things get heated and out of control at times and some of us explode, it's fine to disagree and passionately so that's what make us fans although sometimes some here have a better insight into things and it's time they were respected and not shouted down because it doesn't fit your agenda.
The passive aggressiveness on here is at times shouting like a megaphone for those at are atuned to it, dropping something into the discussion, stirring it about and then watch BS hit the fan as their agenda infects the thread.
Anyway I'm sure they'll be those who'll say I'd rather come here and talk about Bond with fans and not have industry types disagree with my opinion as it's better that way for them as they can then entertain the hyperbole that is caused when ever a new Bond film is greenlit.
I'll just leave this here and wait for the usual suspects to pounce on it.