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
It all just seems like a waste of time and energy to me.
We still have those sadly, and... they report the lies these guys come out with. The Mail printed all that 'Waller Bridge replaces Ford' nonsense.
If complaining about other people is a waste of time then there's some irony here perhaps?
Knowing full well that you don't like their content, but still watching anyway, then complaining afterwards... you can call it what you like, but to me, yes, that's a waste of time.
On a related note, you'll have to forgive me for not seeing the Becoming Bond documentary for obvious reasons.
Brining this back to Indiana Jones, I saw The Last Crusade recently. I think it's been a few years since I saw it last. I daresay that Connery stole the film from Ford.
1. Raiders Of The Lost Ark
2. Last Crusade
3. Kingdom Of The Crystal Skulls
4. Temple Of Doom
Anyway, here’s my ranking.
1. TEMPLE
2. RAIDERS
3. CRUSADE
4. CRYSTAL SKULL
2. Raiders of the Lost Ark
3. The Last Crusade
4. Kingdom of the Crystal Skull
Is anybody here expecting The Dial of Destiny to make their number one spot?
I haven't watched any of it; I just saw a transcript from someone who had.
Being aware of the rise of these sort of 'alternate truth' folks who tell whatever lies they like and are rewarded for it isn't a waste of time, no. There's a lawsuit going in the US right now about a supposed 'news' network where the anchors have been exposed for doing just the same and admitting they're only doing it for viewers and share prices, and yet people still watch them lie and lap it up.
Just ignoring that problem and drawing parallels between being concerned about it and masturbation seems a waste of time to me. There's nothing wrong with drawing attention to lies as being such before they take hold and do damage.
Not obvious for me...?
Regardless, your seeing it or not doesn't alter what's in it, and what I said about the producer of the Bond films saying this sort of thing impacted the Bond films; and I like these movies so I don't want them harmed by anything malicious. Is that understandable?
Release order for me.
I won't rush to the cinema, but I will grab the inevitable 5 films boxset when it's released.
1. ROTLA
2. TLC
3. TOD
4. (you guessed it) KOTCS
But for me, they are a lot closer to each other than what seems to seep from some of other posters' reactions. And to quote @Scaramanga1974 from somewhere on the last page: "Give me Indy over MI any day."
I agree with this, we shouldn't be expecting a new film to live up to the original trilogy this late in the game. The best we can hope for is they tastfully honour the old films and provide Ford and Co a satisfying final bow.
Back to the thread, I hope that the DOD does the franchise proud. The CGI that was in the last one will likely return especially with an 80 year old playing the main role. Lets hope it is handled well and that as many practical effects and stunts are in the movie. I actually thought the ending of the last Indy movie worked well. Interesting to see where this one ends. The cool thing of the series is that if you wanted to just keep it to a trilogy you have Ford et. al riding off into the sunset. If you wanted to keep it to 4 films you have Indy getting married and his son right with him. Where does DOD end things? Will it take a NTTD ending and kill off Indy? Or give the fans a happier ending? Time will tell and my butt will be in a theatre seat to watch.
The Drinker is a gem
The only folks accused of ‘jerking off’ were those who aren’t keen on these channels and don’t watch them. If Critical Drinker never feels the need to put down anyone then that’s fine.
I find the stuff I have seen of him to be very cynically designed in terms of appeal, but I have more of an issue with those of them peddling lies designed to damage products, reputations or careers. The other one is trying his best to harpoon this film before anyone has seen it with lies about test screenings and reshoots, because he sees money in ad revenue presumably and people lap up this outrage stuff, and that upsets me after all the hard work put into it. It’s vandalism, basically, and on a par with saying the CraigNotBond lads were a great bunch of guys. Why can’t we watch the film without the need for these people putting down anyone.
Indeed, and more nuanced than some are capable of understanding .
Drinker makes me laugh, even when I think he's talking nonsense.
Me three. I'll be booking my tickets as soon as they are available. All I hope is the film be better than Crystal Skull, please oh please clear that low bar!
Which is great if you do, but the same can be said for Fox or GB News: the problem is that many people do believe it, and that does harm.
But I'd bet that if Star Wars, Raiders of the Lost Ark or Temple of Doom were released today, they'd be the first to complain about the content. "Why is the lead female character so dismissive of the hero? She's brash up to the point the movie loses all its steam every time she opens her mouth. The depiction of Nazis as supremely evil is cartoon-like, serving some Hollywood narrative, and they actually make up for poor villains. James Earl Jones, as the token black guy who voices Vader, is the weak link in the cast, as he confuses speaking in a deep voice with projecting strength."
There was a time in Hollywood in the second half of the eighties and the early nineties with a ton of machismo and posturing in action films, the stuff actors such as Stallone, Chuck Norris or Steven Seagal could star in. But it has never been the standard otherwise, and it shouldn't be.
Exactly. These are also these flaws that make him grounded and human, with his achievements also looking more heroic in the process, as he experiences fear rather than just rushing into the danger head first.
This is also the stuff I love about Craig's Bond. He made mistakes, he had blind spots, he wasn't the best at everything. Even if he got rid of some of his humanity when he basically made a Faustian deal with M at the end of Casino Royale, he was a figure with more depth and complexity than before. The very idea that he could sacrifice himself in NTTD is still controversial, but prior to this era, it would have been simply blasphemous, as Bond wasn't supposed to ever be in a situation where such an option could be considered.