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
https://play.acast.com/s/the-rest-is-history-podcast/101.jamesbond
EON: We've loaded the new film with Fleming material.
Fans: When we say "Fleming," we just mean Bond should grimace and punch people in the neck for two hours.
It looks like actors (even when they are not producers) may have more power than directors !
NTTD : Danny Boyle doesn't want the end > Boyle leaves.
SP : Ralph Fiennes doesn't want M to be a traitor > the story changes.
Thats barely anything in the film. Why is it a sticking point for you? Are gay people not allowed to be acknowledged unless they’re villains or something?
NTTD : Danny Boyle doesn't want the end > Boyle leaves.
SP : Ralph Fiennes doesn't want M to be a traitor > the story changes.[/quote]
It also just indicates what stale ideas the in-house screenwriters have been trotting out over the years. Everyone's a traitor, everyone is Bond's cousin or childhood ice cream man, M's incompetence motivates the villain, etc
But then again, people read things in different ways. So, it's all open to interpretation. EON's interpretation, in this case. I've no problem with that. But I don't have to like it or read it the same way.
And if we're going back to Fleming, why not having him smoke fifty cigs a day and be a Benzedrine addict? Oh, because that's not the bit that Fleming wrote that really translates well into the cinematic character...right. So why is it being a
Choices, choices
I think my biggest issue with the character is not her being 007, or her attitude and her lack of growth over the film. No, my biggest issue is that you could take her out of the film almost entirely and the story would not be any worse off. She has almost zero impact on the advancement of the plot. She's on the periphery, gets a scene or two to trade barbs with Bond and then retreats back to the periphery again. The film's focus on resolving Bond's personal arc with Madeleine etc. means that the thematic resonance of Nomi taking over his number is pushed into the background when you could easily make a film out of it all by itself. She's not really a character in the end, at all. She's a distraction to the story rather than an aid to it, which is a shame as Lynch sold us something that sounded far more interesting in the lead up to the film's release, and it just wasn't there for me and ultimately slowed an already bloated film down.
Well said. And my exact reading of it. She wasn't necessary. Besides, Bond doesn't need those kind of sidekicks, IMO. Have him infiltrate an island alone. Have him destroy an entire island and operation alone. That's what makes him a hero, IMO. He also didn't need Way Lin, or Jinx for that matter. It's a tendency that remotes to the Moore years, I believe. But I never liked it. Granted, TB had the para-diving army, but that was background noise for what Bond was gonna do, alone. So were Moore's armies. But fellow agents, for me never did work, with the exception of 006 for narrative purposes.
One of my major gripes with the DC films were the earphones, the constant teaming up, the scooby gang, ... Sorry, but not my Bond.
Unless you have the clout of Quentin Tarantino, M. Night Shyamalan, Christopher Nolan you're never gonna have a Bond film made by one screenwriter/director. I'm assuming the likes of Tarantino are rare in Hollywood. Almost every big budget film has multiple writers (some uncredited).
Unless Eon capitulate on an unprecedented scale and let Christopher Nolan write the screenplay (maybe with his brother), you'll never get Bond films written without a committee of writers.
I would put a bet on Nolan being a likely choice to write and direct Bond 26. Co-writer anyway. A rebooted Bond is the idea time for Nolan to do a Bond film. Place your bets!
He'd never be able to escape it, even when Madeleine basically says there's no one left to hurt us, he literally has this virus now, and that in many ways could be loosely interpreted as this part of him that will never go away, just like his life as a 00 and a killer, so in the end, it killed him, and I think this was his way of admitting that, and saying if I really can't have this life that I want, then I'll just accept it and die. Obviously, there's a lot more story significance with the literal fact that if he tried to see Madeleine or Mathilde, or even interacted with someone who then interacted with them, he would kill them, so he'd rather die than let that happen.
I just think it's a lot more poetic, and makes sense in the arc that we've received throughout the Craig-era.
You realize that being entertained and being thrilled are emotions, right?
Not relevant to the Bond universe unless it serves the plot in a meaningful way. Gender signalling by Eon. Woke a-go-go!
Fleming used homosexuality as a plot point. Pussy Galore was a lesbian and Bond cured her of that affliction.
Yes, it's very outdated and sexist and maybe homophobic in tone but it served a plot point. What is the relevance of Q's homosexuality? Are we to imply Q loves/is sexually attracted to Bond? Lol
"James, save me!"
"Oh not right now, Q"
😄
It will for sure.
There will be a 60th anniversary celebration WITH Daniel, I bet.
He will be Bond on paper and in PR stuff (and the new video game?) for at least another 2 years I believe.
Why don’t you hold heterosexuality to the same standard? When we find out Moneypenny is on a date in GE, it’s not a plot point, but nobody complains about that. But if Q is revealed to like guys, OH MY GOD!
Well said!
I saw it again yesterday with some friends in the hope that I may change my opinion. Sadly, no. Hated it more this time round.
Surprisingly all 4 of my mates who watched it were not impressed either (and I made sure I didn't let them know my opinion of it before going in).
When the dust is finally settled on this one, I believe this will be seen as the worst in Craig's tenure. Yes, worse than both QoS and SP.
You are supposed to come out of a Bond film walking a bit taller and feeling like you could take on the world (as Cubby always claimed). Not come out of the cinema depressed and feeling sorry for Bond.
Where was the loaded Fleming material in NTTD, other than a garden with some poisonous plants?
What about OHMSS?
I truly appreciated these two posts. It's wonderful to not feel alone in what one feels.
Well said, my friends.
Oh sure, it made sense within the narrative they constructed. Absolute sense. Logic, even.
What I don't like is the (whole) narrative they constructed
Not a Bond fan, then?
"Do you know what time it is? Time to die."
That one elicited a few groans from my audience and I was with them on it. Very forced. Which is a shame as there were some really nice lines in Bond and Nomi's initial exchange, from both parties.
The idea of Bond losing his number to another agent, male or female, would have been better served in a film that had less going on.
I picked that up too.