› ›

Mendes for Bond25? he may not be done yet, would you want him?

1…4567810»

Comments

  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    The foster brother thing is like 10 seconds of the film. Ok, 20.
    If just omitted from the dialogue, it wouldn't even make much of a difference.

    People having fits because of that is hilarious actually. If you want to hate, you'll always find something, I guess.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    I agree. I don't like it but it doesn't ruin the film for me
  • patbpatb
    Posts: 4,600
    To judge the significance of something within a flm based on how long it is on screen makes zero sense, some movies twist and pivot on tiny moments (re their screen time).

    I dont want to hate, I wanted to love SP, was so "up for it" especially after loving SF and then the great trailers.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    I wanted to love SF. But it's the emperor's new clothes story. Everybody shouts "classic" "wonderful" when only some few kids with pure hearts can see the truth.
    I will say though, and have many times, in some aspects SF really succeeded big time. Cinematography, editing, sound effects, technical stuff. It was really really well made. Maybe one of the reasons so many people can't see past the shiny gift wrapping paper, inside it's rather hollow and boring.

    Spectre on the other hand put Bond back into Bond. And with a bang.
  • patbpatb
    edited January 2017 Posts: 4,600
    if its hollow, what would have filled the vacuum?, interesting as, for me, it has more depth and content than almost any other Bond. (although I think effectively we have two versions of SF, the preSP and the post SP versions )
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    I may not be the best choice to discuss SF with, I admit it's at the bottom of my ranking even, No 24.

    I will say this, its cinematography is unrivalled. The best in the series. The first 70 minutes are perfectly ok, if a tad boring after the PTS.
    The end game, while very unbondian, is nicely shot, the location is visually stunning and I like the scenario, but as I said, not bondian, a DB5 outside doesn't help much.
    To cast Fiennes, Whishaw and Harris was a stroke of genius. I love them all now.
  • patbpatb
    Posts: 4,600
    Not Bondion and hollow are seperate points though? It does push the boundaries in terms of the classic Bond template, but, then, so does linking all 4 DC movies, that, to me, is very "non-Bondian"
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    I have seen tons of people saying the foster brother thing doesn t bother them. Me included.

    I never saw anyone say they love it.

    Me neither. In fact most (if not all) people I've spoken to who are not clued up on Bond didn't even know who Blofeld was, hence, for them, it wasn't even a 'twist'.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    That's the point, it's made very well. It is a wist for the insiders, but not for the general public. It works in the film. It doesn't bother.
  • QuantumOrganizationQuantumOrganization We have people everywhere
    Posts: 1,187
    BondJasonBond006 wrote: »
    he was thinking: I failed miserably with SF and now I will make the best Bond since GE. And he did.
    Hardly.

  • DoctorKaufmannDoctorKaufmann Can shoot you from Stuttgart and still make it look like suicide.
    Posts: 1,261
    QuantumOrganization wrote: »
    no to donaldson

    In that case Campbell or Noyce. But if I had to pick between Mendes and Donaldson, I'd say, Mendes had his two shots on Bond, which would mean Donaldson. But I myself would prefer Campbell. And if not him, then Noyce. He has proven he can deliver high class spy flicks.
  • QuantumOrganizationQuantumOrganization We have people everywhere
    Posts: 1,187
    Donaldson just is a little hit and miss.
Sign In or Register to comment.