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
Fallout isn't playing against 56 years of history. Bond has to be fresh while also working within the parameters of the brand.
This exactly. The only main problems I have with SF is Bond suddenly being too old for his job, some cheesy lines, Kincaid stupidly using a flashlight, and the godawful gun barrel. Do what @talos7 said about the PTS, put a silent and classically designed gun barrel sequence at the start, have Silva spot M in a different way, and the film is pretty much perfect.
Well Daniel Craig was in his mid to late 40s when he made SF. I think Mendes wanted to make a film about middle age and SF is basically Bond’s mid-life crisis. It’s probably a very personal note from the director to incorporate that angle and show the years have burned Bond out.
Personally, I’d rather that a director with a unique touch like Mendes came in an was able to put a unique spin on the formula in this respect. He made a personal film with SF and was still able to tell a Bond story. That is hugely commendable. Also, huge props have to go to Daniel Craig to play burnt-out so very well.
Well if Mendes was injecting a personal commentary on middle age, then it’s an example of the pitfalls of having a director who is an auteur. Obviously Bond is older but the series would have been better served keeping his aging ambiguous. Once being too old is mentioned, it’s a bell that can’t be un-rung.
Exactly. If it wasn't for the aging plot point, then there would be no reason that this new continuity couldn't last decades like the previous one. Now it makes even less sense than the previous because of it. It backs things into a corner.
"Are you ready to get back to work?"
"With pleasure. For a couple years until I gotta retire anyway."
Even Burnout, why? There is Nothing Prior that suggests Bond could be prone to Burnout. If previous films or even better SF itself would have built up to it, yes, great theme. But Nothing of that sort happened, which IMO makes Bond into some miserable sod who doesn´t get his life in order.
The financial success and the mass Catering contained in recent Bond films paints another Picture.
Mendes just seemed to have overlooked that Bond most of the time appeared at least as old as Craig, and still knew very much to enjoy life. Plus, SF follows directly on two films that had Bond already dealing with heavy personal issues. This brings up the Question why such a wimp is given a Job with such responsibility. Again, I would love those themes, as Long as they would be properly built up to.
What you wrote is true for the first three M:I movies, but the last three Mission Impossible films are more high-end than most Bond movies. Watch M:I - Rogue Nation and Tomorrow Never Dies back-to-back, then tell me with a straight face that the Bond film was the more refined one.
Perhaps years of seeing the hypocrisy , and questionable priorities of an otherwise noble nation , organization and immediate superior/ maternal figure led to Bonds “ remaining dead”
The screen play should have locked away and saved for ...now.
Absolutely...
;)
Yet Skyfall is closer to Craig's start than it is to the end of his tenure. Ironic.
Could SF possibly have been written as a potential exit for Craig? Aging themes, anniversary year, new beginning. Makes sense.
https://acting411.blogspot.com/2018/09/metro-goldwyn-mayer-feature-film-bond.html
Haha, nice reference.
Definitely looks like a way to scam you out of $100 to me...
In order to keep this thread open and active could we please move all Skyfall discussion to its own thread.
Any more Skyfall discussion may be deleted.
I don't think so, back then Craig was still contracted to do two more, and MGW even wanted him to do up to eight.
I think it was because of the 50th anniversary.
In my eyes the DC Bond movies are set before the Connery era.
There is only CR, SF and Bond 25.