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
I'm sure that surprises no one here.
As for Mendes, I'm a fan. SF was really good despite a few nagging issues and SP was amazing imo. It had pretty much everything I'd been asking for. What I don't get is why people are surprised at how we've ended up here. That to me is what the whole Craig era has been about. Showing rookie, Flemingesque Bond evolve into the cinematic Connery template, and putting that in a real world context, in terms of the plots and the effect that would have on a person (becoming desnsitised to killing as he was by SP). I thought it was brilliantly done. As soon as he said the introduction line at the end of CR I thought it was clear we'd end up here eventually.
Indeed: Bond talking to a CG mouse, which helps him proceed with his mission. There's a first!
Really like that moment.
From where I'm sat, the opening stunt in mi rn was far more talked about than either of SP s big 2. And how much do we reckon it costs to strap tom cruise to an airplane??
Mendes has delivered so tremendous scenes in sf and SP, brought some truly wonderful cinematography, but unfortunately aspects important to a lot of fans have been found wanting. Bond occupies his own space in cinema, he shouldn't compete with Bourne and mi is just a light popcorn action film made in the shadow of Bond. IMHO both SF and SP would be improved with a proper soundtrack even though Newman did achieve some great tracks here and there, Newmans work just doesn't lift the scenes to excitement level. Mendes does get a lot of stick, not because he's a bad director but because we debate the things wrong with these films and unfortunately he has given Bond fans plenty of ammunition. He also was going to be taken to task by many (myself included) for taking a retrograde step in Bonds development. The lesson being, if your going to try make a classic bond with all of everyone's favourite Ingredients.... Do it right!
I thought CR's Villiers was a perfectly acceptable update of the Moneypenny character. Moneypenny herself is loaded with too many expectations and tropes to be worth the bother. It's not like she did much in the books, I'd rather see Tanner's role beefed up.
It's not just these small moments, though. The entire tone of the film is different from all Bonds that went before it, but SP still manages to radiate the Bond feel. I've said before that if Kubrick had directed a Bond film it would resemble SP and I still maintain that assertion.
"Nobody Lives Forever" has a plot that can (technically) continue the DC story and yet act as it's own standalone adventure. In the book, Bond's housekeeper, May, and Moneypenny are kidnapped. This is part of a plot to draw him out. A villain from the past has put out a contract on Bond -- ten million swiss francs for 007's head severed and delivered on a silver charger. So let's apply this to the DC saga. Bond is out on assignment and receives word that Madeline Swann has been killed. He returns from the field. Other people near Bond die (this happened in the book). Then Moneypenny is kidnapped. Bond discovers that a worldwide contract is on his head and must find out who's behind it. It will turn out, at the end, that it was Blofeld -- pulling the strings from behind bars. (They might even have Blofeld escape at the end so that he can return in a later film.)
It's not the worst of ideas.
It's not the worst of ideas, but it is definitely one of the worst ideas. No more M getting kidnapped, MI6 getting blown up, or Moneypenny/Q getting kidnapped.
If anything, I thought it was Moneypenny harassing Bond by trying to get him to go out on a date, and Bond forever having to make excuses
Its probably Gardner's best book and I'm not against it per se but I think we are all sick of having the plot revolve around MI6 staff so its a no I'm afraid.
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/xmoIDKqfY44"; frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Agreed.
I always saw it as I think Lois Maxwell herself built it up inside her head along with Sean from DN on: They had dated once in the past, thought against continuing their relationship, and now just flirt rather playfully with each other to the entertainment of them both. They seem rather good friends, who can bust each other up without either taking any offense. I'm sure there's a mutual attraction on both sides, especially on Moneypenny's (it's Sean Connery after all), but both have decided that acting on those feelings isn't viable for them or their positions. Bond largely isn't the type to be pegged down to one gal, and Moneypenny knows Bond belongs to the world, is doing important work and understands and accepts his wide attraction to the female form and why he enjoys quick flings that don't overtly distract him as opposed to more serious relationships that would.
This is the Connery and Moore dynamic with Maxwell I'm speaking of above, but I don't think this differs all that much with the other Bonds and their own Moneypennys, aside from Bliss' MP flirting with Dalton's Bond, which was like watching a little kid trying to fit a square shaped peg into a triangular opening; it just doesn't "fit." That Moneypenny killed her chances with Bond the second she brought up Barry Manilow, and rightfully so. *Shivers* I bet that just got Bond all hot and bothered...
Continuing this discussion, I agree that the flirty stuff with Bond and MP in the Craig era has been hit or miss. I find their SF scenes together quite electric, especially during the casino sequence with Naomi filling out that dress very elegantly; it's a moment full of great repartee between them.
In SP, however, it's much more hit and miss as I said. You've got the greatness of Bond's talk with her while she's having someone over to her flat ("It's called life, James. You should try it sometime"), but the lines Bond throws her way when they're in his apartment at the start, like the female intuition nonsense, feel forced and weirdly delivered, and I think they were both past the point of overt flirting post SF. I just want to see them as strong and loyal friends, and get MP depicted as a capable woman Bond can come to if he needs her, and vice versa. Of course, now that Bond is with Madeleine, if Bond 25 does star Craig, it'd feel awkward for their flirting to continue as he's already committed to a woman.
So that's why Bond's in that robe-looking thing later while looking at the case from Skyfall. Interesting.
Hmmm...I think I see a pattern emerging. ;)