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've got brunette tunnel vision, so all I noticed was that she looked like this lass, Lucy, that used to work with us at the time! Not even kidding. But yes, the actress played that scene exactly right.
I just wish we got a scene like this with Naomie in either SP or NTTD
She was very memorable for such a small part. Played it beautifully
A few things I took away from this viewing,
Daniel's performance is electric (probably my favourite Bond performance in the series)
The cinematography is deeply underrated. There's rich vibrant colour throughout
The Madagascar sequence is my favourite best action sequence of the series, so many character moments within such thrilling action.
The dialogue is some of the strongest in the series. I just wish the scripts in the other Daniel's were this strong
Both, yes.
I don't really have anything to add, short of proclaiming that I find the presence of that question mark both offensive and triggering. ;) I don't think there's any debate on that by this point.
Book for me, but it's fine, still liked the film.
I don't think any Bond films are masterpieces of cinema overall. I think FRWL, GF, and OHMSS are masterpieces among Bond films and in the action/adventure genre. I think CR is certainly in the top rank of Bond films, and if folks want to argue it's a masterpiece among Bonds they have a case. I'm not so sure if CR ranks as a masterpiece among action films, though if one was to assemble a list of the best action films of the 2000s it conceivably has a place, depending on the length of the list.
Personally I regard CR as a very good Bond film and action film, but not a masterpiece. The film is too long and its structure is broken-backed, Craig is a too old to play a new 00 with a chip-on-his-shoulder, Arnold's music as usual reminds us that he's not John Barry, Haggis's dialogue is too on-the-nose, the drama scenes are strained, and I prefer the torture scene, card game, and Vesper-denouement from the book.
But I recognize my opinion is very much a minority one and I certainly don't begrudge the film's success with the public and critics. In terms of impact, CR is one of the most important of all Bond films. It revitalized the series in a way no other film had done since TSWLM. And whereas TSWLM played it safe by giving us a greatest-hits compilation, CR took a genuine risk in its story and star that paid off handsomely.
I’m pretty much on this take. CR is usually around the middle of the top ten in my Bond rankings. Of course, I have SF snugged right there with FRWL, GF, and OHMSS among the top of the list and as the years go by my opinion of SF being the strongest of the Michael/Barbara era stands sterner.
Had it been released as something other than a Bond film (which it certainly could have been), I think it would only be half remembered as a melodramatic and clumsily-scripted Bourne knock-off
Speaking of DAD, that film was a child of the times too. Think The Fast And The Furious, XXX, pretty much any action videogame. If CR is a Bourne knock-off, isn't FRWL a Hitchcock knock-off then? Isn't LALD a Shaft / Blaxploitation knock-off? Isn't TMWTGG a Bruce Lee knock-off? Personally I don't like to go there. Films are rarely made in a vacuum; some set a trend, but most either follow a trend, or do a little of both. The Bonds are no different.
Some say that CR is "Bond Begins"; as if Batman Begins gave the green light for CR. Wasn't it MGW who had always wanted to adapt CR, and finally could now that the rights to the book had come home to EON? Also, hadn't they been flirting with the idea of going "Young Bond" since the early '80s? My point is that even without Batman Begins, we probably would have gotten "Bond Begins" in 2006. It's possible that someone looked at Batman Begins and Bourne and found interesting ideas to carry over to CR. So what? Nolan had showed his crew HEAT in preparation of The Dark Knight. Films take from films, and there's always that contemporary climate that films are made in. CR is no different, but I don't think that's a problem either. What still surprises me, in a good way, is how much of the book was kept alive in the script, albeit with lots of added elements.
I acknowledge that CR is not a flawless film in terms of its scipt, but you have to put it under a microscope to reach that conclusion, and that's not how I watch my Bond films. If we are going to scrutinize over Goldfinger's plot, most of Blofeld's schemes, whatever Zorin was doing... we're always going to hit that "this makes no sense!" wall. But isn't that what the Bonds are all about, I wonder? Aren't they just beautifully looking, highly entertaining nonsense? (If I were allergic to such enjoyable nonsense, I'd turn to LeCarré.) Anyway, CR is one of the least nonsensical films of the bunch. Whatever cracks in the story, they're not enough, not in a long shot, to take anything away from my absolute enjoyment of the film.
Yeah our audience on Tuesday was quite full too. It was a great night it felt like it was a new release again
Anyway, it holds up. The cinematography, the action sequences, script... and what a performance from Craig. I remember seeing this film for the first time in the cinema. I was born during Brosnan's tenure, so this was the first time I'd ever seen a new Bond introduced in a new film. I must admit, I was a bit nervous considering the whole 'Craig not Bond' thing leading up to this film. Honestly, the moment Craig came onscreen, I couldn't take my eyes off of him. It's not something I can accurately describe - this wasn't a portrayal of Bond I'd necessarily seen before, and yet everything about Craig - his voice, his mannerisms etc - just made me go 'yeah, that's James Bond'.
For me, CR and SF are the two Bond films I've seen in the cinema when they first came out that I can truly say excited me. Whatever problems I have with the rest of the Craig era - heck, even the ones I have about this film in general - CR is undeniably a highlight of the series.
I basically agree with this (DAF is my favorite Connery!), but for me the difference with CR is that the nonsensical bits overlap very closely with the heavy emotional content of the film (torture, suicide) and don't require a microscope, just a second viewing. There may be some holes in Zorin's planning, but AVTAK doesn't take itself as seriously as CR takes itself, and it's not taken as seriously by fans either--there's no "A View to a Kill: Masterpiece?" thread!
I certainly agree that self-serious films have more of a duty to keep a close eye on their scripts. ;-)
Avatar?!
I mean yes, critics calling it one of the Masterpieces of Cinema, they're overly praising it I think.
For just how much was riding on this film to succeed, and how much Dan was raked over the coals from the moment he was cast in the role...my what a victory this movie was and continues to be. He gives the Bond performance to end all performances, in my eyes, only bettering himself in that category. He just has that thing, and makes every moment compelling to watch. Effortlessly cool, startlingly vulnerable, primal in his action moments, and just a damn fine actor. He gave and continued to give Bond so many layers and such raw humanity that will make his 007 nearer to my heart than any of the others. He really felt like an old friend by the end, and it speaks to the magic he worked that casual moviegoers were in puddles of tears as he died.
CR set the stage for what I feel was a second golden era in Bond, and this movie is one of the main ones (if not THE one) I would select to show to a new viewer to the series. If you don't like this, Bond may not be for you.
@DarthDimi, though I feel SF deserved its big hit status, that year was destined to be big for Bond. It was a long wait for a new Bond, it was the 50th anniversary for the series and the Olympics hit London with Bond a heavy feature, so there was a lot of 007 hysteria going on all year long. It was a perfect storm, and SF took advantage of it. It's hard to imagine any Bond film coming out that year not doing well. Maybe not a billion dollars well, but you get what I mean. ;-)
Completely bloody flawless IMO.