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 didn't want SF2. I just wanted a well written adventure.
100% agree with you!..................RT needs to review their system!
I also got the impression a lot of these reviewers were just downing the film, without actually knowing what they wanted out of the film!.............pathetic!
You gave it a 6/10 (not the worst score in the world) and didn't even want to give it a second chance? You should've! I've heard a lot of people say that it improves on the second viewing (though there are also those who didn't like it even more on the second viewing, as well, so anything's possible.)
It's sacrilege on these boards to question fandom, but if you're not watching it a second time, I personally find that questionable.
In French, "You" can be translated as "Vous" or "Tu".
When you translate "You" with "Tu" it means, in most contexts, that the two persons talking know each other quite well, that they're close friends, colleagues you see out of the job, or from the same family. "Vous" means they're more distant, or that the exchange is formal, and well it's kind of the default mode.
Well, "Why did you come ? / I came here to kill you" : I've just heard a French translation on French TV where they chose "tu" (while in the teasers so far, it was "vous"). It really makes the Blofeld/Bond exchange sounds like "brothers talking". It has just been shown on French news TV. I re-rewatched it, that's the real deal : these were the voices of the dubbers. So there are two versions that exist, one with "Vous" and one with "Tu".
I'll see later if this a glitch from a fast translation done for some purposes (but that's super weird). Otherwise, if they indeed used finally "tu", the French audience will have the "brother" angle hammered to them !
This is coming from the perspective of a Bond fan, but it's worth considering that no one else, excuse my french, would give two tosses. It's irrelevant in the wider narrative. How they interconnect is not important within the story.
There is no Bond film that is perfect, and any one of them can be torn apart with criticism, and we all have our favourites, films and actor portraying Bond. But SP, compared to a lot of movies blockbusters released this year is wonderful entertainment, with classic Bond elements. Craig has been a vital shot in the arm for the series, and I really hope he does at least one more.
For me, coming after the admirable, but slightly underwhelming SF, SP gave me a huge lift. it only falters slightly, in the final act returning to London.
The negativity around here isn't going to change my opinion of SP. I loved it. it hasn't knocked any of my favourites off the top, but its in my top ten, and that's good enough for me. We all want the perfect Bond film, and I still think Craig era is capable of that. Heres to Bond 25, with Daniel Craig as Bond.
There will always be differences if opinion and sometimes opinions change over time. I am an avid Bond fan through the good and the bad times.
I liked SP ...I have seen it twice and probably will again. There are several posters on here I admire even though sometimes we don't always agree.
The negativity gets to me too when coupled with rudeness or pretense. People can get pretty rude here.
My opinion with SP has changed since my first viewing and I'm sure it will again.
I'm still really liking the ending in MI6 up to the helicopter though.
@Mansfield
The landing strip for the airplanes are clearly shown when Bond arrives in the helicopter.
Furthermore what was mere seconds on the screen, were probably several minutes or more in the plot.
You see the vans clearly driving on the snowy mountain pass and then Bond appears with the plane, that could well have been several miles away from the clinic.
People were also mentioning the "formula". I actually thought the elements of the Bond formula that were thrown in were some of the strengths of the film. It was just where they took it too far, with Q, M, and Moneypenny doing way too much.
Yes, IF...
you complain about negativity and bashing about Spectre but at the same time you bash Brosnan in another thread. Nice.
Goldfinger was stand-alone...not that that matters ..just voicing an opinion.
Brosnan didn't take himself seriously in that interview. It's a mixture between modesty and playfulness with the media. He's similar to Moore in that aspect.
But of course if you feel he was miscast, that's your prerogative.
I think his problem was that he didn't put his own stamp on the role. A recent programme with Mark Gatiss described him as "Roger Connery". Sort of says it all.
You obviously don't know much about the franchises history.
Go and check out Everything Or Nothing and you'll know why BB + MGW felt it was time to go into another direction. It had nothing to do with Brosnan himself.
Furthermore it was Brosnan that at first hindered himself of receiving another contract due to his demands for money.
Although I enjoyed SP, I was going to note some issues I had with the film like your comment I bolded above which I totally agree with. For me, it cut back on screen time that could haven better gone to Bond, Swan, Hinx and Blofeld. There's plenty of room for pros and cons about the film, but some of the stuff on here was just getting way to hostile to respond to.
Peter Franks too #9.
Taro
White
Silva
Blofeld
Koskov
Nick Nack
Jaws presumably at end of MR
Yousef sp? QoS
Stick to an expanded role for at most one of the core characters. I'd argue that in SP it should have been Q. The surveillance storyline fits him best, and frankly the M scenes felt like padding.
Why did the car chase have to keep cutting back to MP? The solution should have been to make the chase more exciting, not include her at this point. And Lucia should have been in the car with Bond.
I loved the film. It had a simply easy to follow plot. Not every Bond film needs to be "Intelligent." It was a fun romp that tied off the loose ends of Quantum of Solace and took Bond on an adventure. Sure it has it's flaws but I didn't care. I didn't watch the film to hunt for it's flaws. Bond is back, I couldn't be happier. Bring on B25 now. :-bd.
As my kids say, This!
That had a little more maturity and weight to it than the TB caricature that they did here. Having said that, it's always good to see a good old fashioned SP meet with some thug being killed for whatever reason in front of #1. Where was pussy? Oh I forgot.....it appeared later.
Now that you bring up the Tosca scene, at least they found a better place to meet. ;)
I really am impressed with this film. Mind you I'd prefer Guy Hamilton or Terrence Young to be directing but for a Mendes effort, it was pretty good. I think he got a lot of stuff right and still managed to indulge some post SF drama as well.
I thought Mendes did a nice job further establishing the Mi6 crew he put together in SF.
Craig's performance was stellar and if Bond is played right, that goes a long way IMO for making a great Bond movie. A good convincing Bond helps ground the whole film.
I much prefer SP to SF. SF has grown on me though, but SP delivers more of a straight up Bond adventure.
I am not going to expand now, but I do believe the story holds up just fine. It makes perfect sense that SP all along was the operation behind the first three films, especially as it concerns Silva.
CR hinted right from the start that there was a powerful secret organization operating behind the scenes. All that QoS did was give it a name, but still its broader scope and leadership was not revealed. There was still more to be seen. SP, even though it is a retcon, does bring everything full circle.
I am thinking Eon was trying to create SP from the start,as far back as CR, so SP the movie is not a full retcon. But post SF, Eon finally got license back to use Spectre and Blofeld again, and this film serves as the big reveal.
If Spectre has existed to the extent that we see in this new film, there is no way Silva is running operations like his independently. Spectre as we saw, is and has been everywhere.
Silva was operating under the Spectre umbrella, but still doing his own thing, much like DN in 1962. DN was Spectre, but quite independent too.
He was a tentacle.
I don't think Spectre's existence is needed toexplain Silva's activiites in SF. I think SF holds together on its own well enough. Silva had plenty of his own means. His gig was his gig, but his activities provided yet another tentacle for Spectre
What we learn I think, is that Silva was operating with Spectre's blessings, and that he was part of the broader organization.
But what we do learn in the new film is Blofeld is the big cheese. He's got a cult like grip on the whole operation. We saw that in Rome. He's running all the bad stuff in the world to some extent. Illuminati like even.
As for Blofelds history with Bond, I can roll with that. It's a tad cute, but so what, it wasn't overplayed. Bond didn't seem to care. Oberhauser was Bond's mentor and temporary guardian for a short bit, just as he was in the Fleming novels.
Bond was actually raised by his aunt after his parents died. This hasnt' changed.
Just turns out Oberhauser had a completely derganged criminal genius son. A bad seed who has unpleasant memories of Bond taking away some of his daddy time.
Old Hannes Oberhauser probably slept with a knife under his pillow suspecting he might be raising Damien from Omen, and he was right.
OK so in the new reboot continuity, poor old Hannes was killed by his wacko son,and not by the greedy murderous Dexter Smythe. Whatever....
So this new history doesn't bother me, because it's not overstated. Bond is not affected in any way. What is important I think, is that Eon has managed to skillfully introduce Blofeld and Spectre into the rebooted continuity.
This sets up great going forward. And this Blofeld is full-on Ernst. Don't forget he faked his own death and tossed the Oberhauser name.
What we've got is full-on Ernst Stavro Blofeld, all-powerful leader of Spectre in all his mad glory once again, with nice nods to the original film series, with the inclusion of the scar origins ,and the presence of the iconic white cat.
I find this new film to be a very encouraging Bond film. I love the way everything has been tied together with previous stories and how we are set-up going forward.
Its a gateway film to some extent, setting the series up potentially for decades to come.
I would love to see Bond battling Spectre or divisions of Spectre indefinitely going forward. Blofeld must not be killed. In future films, he can be front and centre, or in the background.
He will escape and he will come after Bond and Swann in the next film. I am sure of it, just as I was sure way back before leaks, or anything conclusive, that Waltz was being cast to play Blofeld.
There is much good, Bond and Blofeld stuff ahead!
I don't think Eon ever intended to kill Ernst anyway. They finally dumped him down a smokestack out of frustration with McClory and his insistence on controling the character rights, and using him in his own film, so it was goodbye Ernst, but he's back now in all his deranged glory.