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
If the London Metro has a very good review as has been mentioned then that is great.
The widest read newspaper by far in Switzerland also is the free tabloid-ish "20 Minutes" which will have a review during the next days. It is also an app and reaches even more people through that. Looking forward to that review.
Another homage from Sam Mendes..
Reviews are more important than you think. They can sink a movie before it's started.
Or elevate the hype to unknown heights as happened with Skyfall, where probably half the audience was sure SF was great even before it saw it. That's called manipulating/swaying/affecting.
Word of mouth is definitely the important thing once the movie has hit the theaters.
If WoM is good it will help the movie, even if reviews were mixed. If WoM is mixed then other factors will weigh in heavily like the competition (the undecided will maybe, maybe not go and watch it).
In any case, it's a complicated science that no one has mastered yet, or we would only have sure hits in the cinema :)
At first the hype and the reviews made the general public want to go and see it.
WoM was very good on SF, it's a mixture of everything.
And SF is an example where everything was falling into place perfectly!
SF as GF will always be one of the greats in the memory of the general public.
That's true. The reviews will get butts in the seats at the beginning (and perhaps some of the late comers who don't come out on week 1) but inevitably it's the film's quality in a first hand impression (and more importantly, 'feel good' factor) which will draw in repeat viewers.
SF was an unquestionable phenomenon. It was a 'feel good' and more importantly a 'look good' film - particularly on the big screen. After TDKR disappointed a little in that respect, SF took the baton for 2012. Regular casual people saw it and then insisted on seeing it again with either family or friends....something that normally only diehards do.
But it wasn't a phenomenon for you ;-). It's funny how many reviewers...and MI6community-forummembers are now saying that. When I said that for the past 36 months, people in here made me....rather ridiculous :-). To put it mildly. I said on numerous occasions that SF was that "special" Bond film that drew in new audiences, that would be loved perhaps more by critics than by typical Bond fans. "To heel to critics" many said, but the $1.1 Billion does say something about the universal attraction and magnetism of the film.
"SF" is perhaps the best film from Craig within and outside the franchise. But "SP" is perhaps the best Bond film within the franchise...
Again even the more negative reviews are saying the film is entertaining at least. I think that is going to give the film legs.
If SF was a fine five course meal then SP is a big ol Texas bbq. Big overblown but just as tasty.
DAD and QS are like McDonald's and Burger King respectively ..nasty but we eat there anyway and sometimes like it.
Yes, SF is, as I said before, like GF and will always remain that way for the general public.
Critics and hard-core fans like we are, will look upon SF differently with time.
SP is hard to tell right now. Some say it's Craig's TB, I said it's his YOLT.
But who knows, it might be another QOS (without the editing mess), it might be Craig's DAD, MR or TSWLM, we will see.
In any case we have Casino Royale which no one will ever be able to take away from us.
I don't even know whats going on anymore.
When Skyfall was released, everyone around me was hating it. I remember people coming out of the Cinema and just whining all about it. i had to defend it everywhere while people were saying "this is not a Bond Movie".
Thats why i don't even care for all the negative comments about Spectre. Most of these Critics don't even care for what a Bond movie is, or supposed to be.
LTK and Goldeneye only have around 82% on RottenTomatoes. Who Cares?
This could be my favorite Movie of Craig, there is no reson for me not to think that. It could have an awesome revenge plot and great action.
Movie critics never get good action movies and never will, they only care about movies when someones crying at the end and feeling bad about himself
@Gustav_Graves, I think it's been quite obvious to all of us that SF was a phenomenon. You are not the only one to grasp that. It is well known that the film brought in new audiences and garnered a lot of praise. However, one should not confuse that with its quality (irrespective of the glowing/fawning/gushing/cooing tributes from reviewers everywhere). Those reviews were an added boost.
I objectively think it's severely overrated by the general public and on this forum. I've said that many times. It has several flaws, and those who dislike it are correct to point it out here and elsewhere. That does not subtract from the fact that it provides a very enjoyable subjective viewing experience, which I've also said on many occasions, particularly on the lengthy SF critique thread. That is why it got repeat viewings, and why it made bucketloads of money.
It is not, however, a 'special' Bond film. It is just a film that exceeded expectations - and this is the key. Expectations that were terribly low after QoS failed to deliver for the majority of casual (and die-hard) fans, and which were built up after the 4 year (and perhaps 6 year since CR) wait. It harked back to the Bond films of old (with the reintroduction of familiar elements like Q, male M & MP) and also was visually stunning. Most importantly, it captured the British public's imagination in a banner year (Olympics & Jubilee). The timing was perfect. The mood was perfect.
One should not confuse that success with how good of a film it is. SF is certainly not the best film from Craig within and outside the franchise. That is undoubtedly (imho) CR, until I watch SP.
Having said that I am expecting based on what I have read to just thoroughly and blindly enjoy SP for what it is. Maybe it's groundbreaking in that way.... celebration of all Bond and the culmination of the road travelled through the Craig films(?).
Like Oz for Bond.
Oh no, you're not one of those people who eats in the cinema are you?
Lol ...those cinemas that serve dinner during the movie are cool but I'd rather not see SP in that venue.
Just for tmi reasons
:D
=D dancing the happy dance.
A friend just posted:
I have just been listening to Mark Kermode on BBC Radio 5, broadcast in front of an audience from the Empire Leicester Square. He has given Spectre a great review.
Daniel gave a good interview with Simon Mayo. I watched the video.
i remember Piercetodaniel saying, he sat before him and he draw a big sigh at the end, which he said, was of being happy, it was over. So happy, that was wrong.
If the main criticism of Spectre is that it feels more like a traditional Bond Movie then i for one will be over the moon. I just read a 5 star review online that said Spectre is "the most Bond Bond film ever."
But the problem is every time someone like BondJasonBond points out criticism, there are people like germanlady who'll all out attack him.
we have to accept there are movies like OHMSS which are above criticism over here
what was Kermode's verdict on Skyfall >
He loved it, for different reasons than he did SP, these are two different beasts.
That's a good thing