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.e. ,Favorite artists to stone deaf teenagers who simply can't sing and are awful but they will generate some profits simply on the name power alone..
For such a grand event this calendar year and all the celebrations of the franchise etc, they could maybe bring back Tom Jones again, or McCartney, or even Bassey for a record 4th time, but they know some awful music that some kids 'enjoy' today will be a bigger pull and to hell with traditions etc, I know I'm going to be eventually frustrated with the eventual decision for Skyfall as I'm adamant it won't be someone favorable, but it's all about opinions etc
Garbage in 1999 did put together a very good tune too, I'd take them right now for 2012 if it meant something 'less suitable' would miss out. TWINE theme intro, while not as good as 1997, is one of the better tracks of the last twenty years without question
Eon has to grapple with their own longevity. For decades, they have faced the challenge of pulling in younger viewers--in other words, not making it seem like "your father's/grandfather's Bond." The easiest way to do this is with the title artist. I don't agree with their choices sometimes (e.g. Jack White), but I see why they do it, from a marketing perspective.
Now that I've said that, I'm sure someone will start complaining about Arnold. It's almost predictable and more reliable than a weather report.
Yeah I agree with this. It's very underrated.
The track is called "Snow Business" :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gB6seXsmcCs
Other than that, the musical scores in 1979 were very hard to beat, it's one reason why I hold that years release in a more favorable light
Thanks, I knew it was something like that. Getting old.
Yes, a great effort by Barry, one of the only saving graces in the movie.
1987 all the way. The living daylights was an awesome song. Something about it just is different compared to the other songs. Its my favorite title song by far.
Is it that three guys from Norway provided the title track and this never happened before, or after ; - )
A-HA did some good songs back in the day but I never was a fan of that one, 'The Sun Always Shines on TV' is the best the group ever produced, but that was simply unfitting of a Bond song, but it's still the best they ever did
The Pretenders 'If there was a man' is also a good song, I think Chrissy Hynde should of had a cameo in that years release, they approached Morten Harket and he declined, maybe they did the same with her, but it seems doubtful
Good explaination. Pretty much sums it up. Craig has portrayed the same guy as the others, but in a younger, less assured way. He has been a rookie 007, which I don't mean is a bad thing, mind you. The others have IMO played an experienced 007, the guy most people refer to when thinking about Bond, while Craig has shown how he got there. That isn't criticism, I just think he has portrayed a new Bond, but will be the old one in SF. After seeing that movie I think we can judge if he is twice the 007 Roger is. But please don't take offense, I like Craig as the rookie 007 too. But I have been looking forward to the return of the experienced 007. And judging from the trailer I won't be disappointed.
I miss the GF-formula in the Bond films. I think it should be present in atleast one of Craig's movies.
Y'know, Bond had a smart phone before smart phones existed: TND.
I've read a lot of ridiculous stuff around here, and it all narrows down - as usual - to one person's opinion being imposed on another member and the pot calling the kettle black. All we ask is for certain members to post their opinion, not in a condescending manner of course, not even subtly condescending (you know the type), allow others a reply and back away. Some members understand the practice of adult debate. Others, however, can make well-written and insightful posts - which is a quality we enjoy for sure - but often fail to accept posts with contrasting views of things.
It has become clear to me that as long as this bickering continues, instead of working from a general policy, we might have to apply different rules per group of members. It might be useful, you see, to select certain rules specifically for those hotheads that just . can't . let . it . go. Some folks might need a peculiar warning: one post per thread per day or you're out! Is that the coarse I'd like to set? No, by all means, no. But the level to which some perfectly good threads have been sickened by arrogance and self-indulgence lately, forces me in more extreme thoughts. Should that day come, then damn some of you for letting it come that far!
Already the first pages of this thread are both an embarrassment AND an insult for the good people who try to organize this place into a nice, warm and cosy forum for Bond fans. With verbal hooliganism trashing up a structure that certain folks pay good money for and others labour hard to keep going well, some people really need to evaluate their own conduct. In the end I'm not so ignorant as to think that we'd all get along perfectly well. But when grown-up members with the ability to make fairly neutral posts yet with a clear passion for Bond, members who know when to press the issue but also when to leave, decide to drop out from a debate because once more it finds itself derailed by pointless bickering or nonsensical interventions, some of which are pure and simple spam, I feel the need to re-educate some of our members. Hence this post of mine, which will no-doubt upset a lot of people and I apologize to those who feel incorrectly targeted.
Don't push things beyond a reasonable limit, if you please. I love this place. I take it we all love this place. But let's not forget that we are all guests in the house of the big figures upstairs who allow us the indulgence of the best house-kept and most informative Bond fan website / web forum on the Internet. So if anything, learn to behave, play by the rules and let's keep doing what we've always done so far: enjoy the hell out of ourselves, as Bond fans united.
Thank you for your attention.
My own experience has taught me a couple of key points when posting to forums such as these. I try not to make these mistakes and hopefully the mods will correct me if I do...
Firstly, when someone has a different opinion as you about something it doesn't mean that they "don't get it". Maybe they do "get it" and just don't like it. To suggest otherwise implies that there is only one correct way of viewing something.
Also, just stating that something is just your opinion doesn't excuse then saying that someone doesn't understand Bond if they have a different opinion.
I think that some people here genuinely mean well when they do things such as above - they think that if they can just get people to see that they're wrong then they'll see the light and change their opinions. But we have to trust that the mods (and they have shown that have have good judgement) are good arbitrators of what is appropriate or not. Just because we aren't calling someone names or swearing doesn't mean that the posts we make are appropriate. I'm pleased to be a guest here so I happily submit to the "rules of the house".
On topic, as I said before, I would enjoy seeing Bond smoke again. One of the greatest moments of the Bond franchise, for me, was seeing Connery light up a cigarette as he introduces himself as "Bond, James Bond." I love it.
As for Craig's last two films, I've enjoyed the gritty, dark, brutal route they have taken. What kind of sparked in my mind earlier was when I read something on the teaser discussion thread, when someone spoke along the lines of how the teaser didn't feel like a Bond film - in a good way, because it feels totally different to anything we have had in a long time, and I agree. I think SF is going to be something really enjoyable and unique, apart from Craig's last two outings, at the same time.
I do believe, that this needs an own thread to be read by everybody. Mind you, I do think, I am included in this critisism and accept that. But I would like it to stop and that is only - eventually possible - if its read. It shouldn't be hidden in another thread. My two...
1.Gun Barrel
2.Sense of humor
3.Love scenes that ended the Bond films
4.Gadgets
definitely in SF that is the case, but humor was nowhere in QOS and a little bit in CR, but that was ok, because of the seriousness of the film.
I laugh all the time in QoS. Some of my favorite moments are when Bond goes into the 1 star hotel, looks around, hates the look of it and goes to a nicer hotel saying he is a teacher who just won the lottery. The dialogue between Bond, Mathis and Fields is great, and some of Bond's sharp remarks at Greene are funny. I also love when Bond and M are in Mitchell's apartment, and M tells Bond about the ash tray she got him, his answer being "I don't think he smoked" before M crashes it down on the floor. Just a couple examples. I love the humor, but to each his own of course.
:)) That bit is great... Other part that i like - not with so much humour tho - is when Fields say that Bond and Mathis needs to get back to England in the next plane by the next day, then Bond says that they have all night :D
"I think she has handcuffs."
"I do hope so."
That, and Mathis screaming "Callate!" to the taxi driver the whole ride to the hotel(s).