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
$112 Million is impossible. BoxOffice.com talks about a good, though not impressive $55 Million opening weekend:
http://pro.boxoffice.com/statistics/bo_numbers/early_estimate/2015-08-01
I have to agree. When I saw the 112million opening weekend estimate I was like wtf? This was tracking at around a 50 million weekend opening.
$112m Internationally.
Makes more sense.
Simple question:
'Ghost Protocol' or 'Rogue Nation'?
With opening weekends I am usually referring to the domestic opening weekends.
Having said that, it seems "Mission: Impossible II"s opening weekend of $58 Million (back in 2000) still stands very strong. Still, I wouldn't be surprised as the final figures on Monday will point to a near $60 Million opening weekend. But if it stays at $55 Million, then, well, it's an OK-opening weekend. But not great or incredible.
I think this has in part to do with the rather lacklustre promotion-/marketing campaign. Don't forget that "Rogue Nation"s first trailer premiered at almost exactly the same time as the "SPECTRE" teaser trailer. I think the hasty re-scheduling of the premiere date from December to July has something to do with it.
The success of the "M:I"-franchise usually lies in the longevity, in the strong holdover. Something similar that the Bond-franchise has. But Paramount should plan better / create a promo-campaign way way earlier to boost interest for the film. On top of that, Warner's "The Man From UNCLE" is on "Rogue Nation"s heels with a way way more expensive publicity campaign, that included an astonishing comic-con trailer.
Tough luck...my PC got some issues so I have to write my mini-review now..and from my friends house.
I enjoyed Rogue Nation.
It had everything that M;I movie should have.
Good:
Cruise is awesome. Pegg is awesome. The action was pretty good, and the main chick in the movie was great as well. Adding kickass ladies is a nice addition to the franchise. M:I movies always knows how to do action scenes. M:I IMHO is the best action franchise right now and maybe of all time (Bond is not only action, he is much more) The score was alright. Nothing too amazing but just good.
Bad:
It lacked "the stakes are too high" thingy. I think that the 6th movie should add a badass villain, sort of like "anti-Hunt" character. With that said I enjoyed the villain of this movie.
It lacked..impossible...almost every movie so far had something "HOLY SHIT HE CAN'T POSSIBLY DO THAT.....OH WOW HE ACTUALLY DID IT" type of mission. In this movie they even reference that. "The mission was tough..but certainly not impossible" is a literal quote from the movie.
With that said M;I Rogue Nation was highly enjoyable action movie. I don't know if I rate it higher than Ghost Protocol but definitely a movie I'd see again when it comes on BluRay (or maybe even again in cinema ?who knows). I feel like the movie suffers from being too..Mission Impossible-ish..meaning we all know what to expect from these movies and we are not too surprised by some of the things. Casual fans might get bored after this movie so they need to change a thing or two for the 6th one. Now I get why some Bond fans are bored by Craig's "personal vendetta" movies.
Not me tho, but I can see what they mean. That's why I need they should add an anti-Hunt character in the next one so we can say "Oh wow this guy is unstoppable".
Overall 8/10. It has everything you would expect.
SPOILER kinda ?????? not big of a spoiler..it's literally first thing you see in the movie but...::
I added spoiler tags to the last bit. Please use those in the future instead of adding a spoiler warning.
And as for Rebecca Ferguson. I don't really know anything about her but my god!
MI5 and the new Mad Max are the best 2 action movies this year. Over to you, Mr Bond...
Now you are comparing Bond films with M:I-films........."Casino Royale"? Or "Mission: Impossible - Rogue Nation" ;-)? "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" or "Mission: Impossible - Rogue Nation" :-P? And what about this one: "Rogue Nation", "M:I-1" or "Ghost Protocol"?
Where I feel this film was weak was with the story's lack of gravitas but with this sort of film that's not necessarily a bad thing. Everything came together nicely and Bond really does have a lot to live upto in the action stakes.
"Rogue Nation" premieres next week here in Spain, so I have to wait a bit.
But I just hope....really hope.....the film is not 'just' an action flick, but also a bit more. Are the action set-pieces part of the plot? Do they enhance the story and its gravita?
In a way, you can also say that Bond surfing on an ice-rock in "DAD" was thrilling, inventive and spectacular too. But for me words like 'thrilling', 'inventive' and 'spectacular' sound a bit...hollow.
I hope "Rogue Nation" is also a bit more.....espionaga thriller/drama. Because in all honesty, even my most favourite "M:I"-film still can't beat many good spy thrillers....good Bond films.....like "FRWL", "OHMSS", "GF", "SF" and especially "CR".
So far this year, I thought "Kingsman: The Secret Service" was the most inventive spy film of the year. Many Bond fans disliked it, because they didn't like the negative use of Bond references. But for me there was more to that film. Seeing a guy like "Eggsy" grow up in poor East-End London brings a bit of good drama to it. The death of Colin Firth really worked, and reminded me of some dramatic deaths in films like "OHMSS", "CR", "Mission: Impossible III" and "SF". Not to mention Colin's magnificent acting. And Henry Jackman's delightful score which so far sounds better and more original/less standard as Joe Kraemer's score.
On top of that, I will have a good, critical look at the acting next week. But I feel Rebecca Ferguson could be the best 'Hunt-girl' ever....So for her Barbara and Michael should keep a good eye on her.
By the way, like everyone else here I am a Bond fan and I'm pretty damn certain "SPECTRE" will wipe off "Rogue Nation" from its arse :-P.
https://hmssweblog.wordpress.com/2015/08/02/the-hunt-for-bond-mi-connections-to-007/
It makes me feel good that Craig's Bond outings inspired so many other wonderful actors, like Tom Cruise :-).
Following Fox Home Entertainment, also Paramount is going to release a set of limited edition steelbooks. They all have, more or less, the same cover-art. The "Ghost Protocol" title is slightly downplayed:
Sorry, but I clearly stated I enjoyed it more than "the last Bond movie" which was Skyfall, @Gustav. I found MI5 less predictable than SF which added to my enjoyment, not knowing where it was going in the 3rd and final act. Now, if I was to compare it to OHMSS then Bond wins hands down. However, I was clearly making a SF vs MI5 comparison. I hope that clears up any doubt?
Ooowh don't worry, it was already clear to me ;-). But I'm just curious about the other comparisons I made. It's only fair that, if you compare Hunt with Bond, also a few other comparisons can be made :-).
I think it's only valid to make simple comparisons between SF and RN. So it's not that weird to make other simple comparisons. If you say RN is way better than SF, especially action-wise, then be daring enough to compare CR with RN. It makes me curious.
Every director IMO hold its own ground. If it's Sam Mendes or Martin Campbell. I think both created classics. But if you look solely to action, then you must admit also RN is better than CR no?
It's not just an action flick and tge set pieces aren't just shoehorned in for the sake of it. There's a compelling reason why the action takes place and they're all executed brilliantly. The opera scene is a great moment and the water scene supports and is also juxtaposed a critical moment to move things along.
I wouldn't use those words back then at the time of it's release, not now and not ever. Those scenes were absolute shit.
It is a very good espionage thriller but I don't want to go into details without potentially bringing up spoilers. There's a reason why this movie is getting such a positive reception and although it's an excellent action movie, it's more than that and feels like a combination of heightened MI4 mixed with MI. This film is very enjoyable. It doesn't have the depth and layers that SF strive for but it's a straightforward, entertaining spy thriller.
If you liked Kingsman then you're going to love MI5. That's all I'll say.
She absolutely is. She really stole the show to be honest. Credible in everything she did. She got her butt kicked and she also kicked butt. I can assure you tge likes of Marvel will try and snap her up for a comic book movie shortly. The acting overall was spot on and the humour expertly handled.
I sincerely hope you're right but as I've been saying; in addition to all these spy movies doing well, it's not only great for tge genre but films like MI5 and hopefully UNCLE doing really well critically and financially allows for high competitiveness, which means Bond has to strive to bring it's A game. I was very impressed and more than content with MI5 and seeing the trailer for SP on tge big screen before tge film started only fueled my hope that the movie delivers majorly on what the trailer shows because Bond can do it and he plays second fiddle to no one.
The problem with comparing CR with RN is that they're different types of movies. Whereas CR is an origins story (Bond Begins if you will?) RN already has a fully developed and rounded Hunt character sent on a mission to uncover the threat so there's no need for lengthy introductions. RN doesn't need any backstory, we're dropped straight into the new chapter from the get-go. If I start comparing RN with an older Bond movie such as CR then where does it stop? Skyfall was the most recent Bond event movie and one I admit I enjoyed less than Craig's other Bonds which is why I mentioned it. If I was to say I enjoyed CR and RN equally, would that suffice?
I endorse everything @doubleoego comments on. He fully understands where I'm coming from.
Totally agree with this. Don't agree with some posts that think that all of this years spy films help SP. The fact that Kingsman, Spy and in particular MI (with Uncle and Bridge of Spys still to open) have received such good critical and BO response only puts greater pressure on Mendes to deliver a very good movie. My problem with Mendes has always been that he is a drama guy, a stage guy, with minimal talent for action. His choice of Logan and Newman further increases my uneasiness with his Bond judgement. The action scenes in SF were generic with Bond a bystander in most of them. Additionally, Logan and Mendes gave all the big SF drama dialogue to M and Silva which left Bond nearly a supporting character in his own film.
If the final filmed script and action scenes aren't strong, the critics will hack away at SP using the script related emails in the leaks as amo, and compare the film to MI5 and the other 2015 Spy films in a unkindly way. Also, many reviews of MI5 note its similarities to Bond. Spy movie fatique is very possible if this film and WOM ain't great. And we still have Uncle and Bridge of Spys about to open.