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
At least all the bond films released in years ending in 7 have been bangers, 1967, 1977 1987, 1997.
I'm not a huge fan of YOLT or TSWLM either.
It's the 3rd best bond movie since TLD.
Wow!
For that opinion alone you deserve not to see a new Bond film until 2028...at least! ;)
But then, they've done it before, Bond films just have an interval of (maybe) 1 year, and it did impressive!
So why to take longer now?
Actually, filmmaking these days are a lot more easier with CGIs and etc., Compared to the old days where it used to be in actual sets with actual props, but they could easily finish the film in months, the same for the script, and the entire production.
I don't know what took them so long these days, when it doesn't need to go like that.
At least the villain doesn't hate bond because of daddy issues! 8-}
Ok, you've redeemed yourself slightly because of that opinion. 2026 now.
Exactly. I'm sick of every film nowadays billling itself as a deep exploration and such. Bond is bond, he has his walther, his dicky bow, his car and he saves the world from the evil baddies. It doesn't need to be anymore complicated than that. The producers should take notes from the mission impossible and JOHN WICK franchises, just like they did from Jason Bourne and The Dark Knight films in the past.
Die Another Day officially wrapped production in 2002 and Daniel was announced as the next Bond in 2005. Bond 25 wrapped in 2019, and we probably won't get a new actor announcement until at least 2026 - that's 7 years!
however way you want to look at it, EON really could be doing better. If I was a universal exec I would be pulling my hair out. :))
Wouldn't quite go that far, but I really like TND.
It's a fun entry in the series.
Brosnan encapsulates the "men want to be him, women want to be with him" dimension of Bond, especially at his smoothest in GE and TND.
Correct me if I'm wrong at some points:
1. Both plots involved the Royal Navy (both even have Bond in a Naval Battle Dress).
2. Both villain plots involved ships and seas (Stromberg's Atlantis to Carver's Stealth Ship), both plots involving seas.
3. Both also involved a hijacking of ships HMS Devonshire and Liparus (?).
4. Both involved a Bond Girl who's a rival agent (Wai Lin, a rival agent from China and Anya, a rival agent from Russia).
5. Both villains wanted to start a War.
But, I think TND is a better version of the story than TSWLM, at least.
I think Elliot Carver had a lot more presence and been given more of a wide role than Stromberg, the same for Wai Lin given a lot more to do than Anya.
I think, it's meant to celebrate the 20th Anniversary of TSWLM?
Please don’t speak for all on this topic, @Mendes4Lyfe … There were only two actors who played Bond who really identified as cool. Brosnan wasn’t one of them, IMO. Couldn’t throw a punch to save his life, wasn’t charming nor funny like Moore; couldn’t hold a candle to Sean and Dan’s masculinity and alpha status…
But at least the first half of TND is the type of Bond he should have stuck with….
Yup! This I agree with.
I don’t think he was trying to speak for everyone when he typed that comment, merely he was just stating his opinion. If you disagree with him that’s okay, but I certainly agree his assessment, and audiences at that time and to this day do as well. Sometimes it’s okay to be wrong 😉
As for the film itself, I used to dislike it quite a bit. I believe I even dismissed the film as bland, but then I realized that a lot of Bond films already borderline on being bland or generic, so I stopped dismissing TND as such. It’s jumped a view spots in my rankings these last few years mainly down to the villains plot, but I don’t think Jonathan Pryce himself comes across as intimidating. It’s not Top 10 material for me, but after the “serious as a heart attack” approach to the Craig era, I always find myself missing the lighter Bond films that Brosnan, and TND perfectly encapsulate.
I don’t think anyone’s opinion is wrong, @007ClassicBondFan , but Mendes’s MO in the past is to speak as if he’s an authority on what the fans want and what the fans need. His facts usually are incorrect or he conflates and mixes and matches to suit whatever point he’s trying to make and often misinterprets what he reads. I’ve personally caught him out on this site repeatedly.
And since I can’t get in his head, I was asking that this time, please don’t do his usual (and, more so, expressing my hope he wasn’t).
But no opinion is wrong (so not quite understanding your point).
Anyways, this is a thread on where Bond goes after Craig. So… where does it go?
Yes, Dalton wouldn't have likely to be successful in the 90's, as much as I liked Dalton, the Brosnan films did reinvigorated the Franchise after its 5 years sleep.
Brosnan brought success to the Franchise (big box office, the video games and etc.).
I don't think the Franchise would've survived with Dalton had he continued, Brosnan was the right one at the time, it also helped that Brosnan was a famous star at the time (following after the Remington Steele), so it also helped to sell the Franchise.
The Franchise was at its most hardest situation at the time, not knowing how to survive: the legal battles that put them on hiatus, the new era which was the 90's and keeping Bond's relevance, and technology, also new competition from new sets of films and genres, it's hard.
And there's Brosnan who started with Goldeneye, with it being successful, and it even launched a video game that became iconic, as much as they're generic, his films are what the Franchise needed at the time.
Looking now with a modern eye, I can point out some flaws that went wrong in the Brosnan Era (and maybe his portrayal of Bond), but it's necessary at the time.
That was just a lighthearted joke on my end. Nothing more to it, hence the inclusion of the winking emoji. We both know based on our previous conversations that I’m far from forcing opinions onto others; I just share them passionately.