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
CRAIG: "Let's get this over with. I've been up here all day, and I need to take a piss."
I smell something, @Escalus5 ...
92% Fresh Score
$1.1B at the BO.
Oh. It's the sweet smell of success. ;)
If we could leave the general masses to decide what was “art” we would consider Dr. Dre above Beethoven
I wouldn’t consider the film critics the masses. SF satisfied everyone, except those who walked into the theater already wanting to despise it. “A fault finder will find fault in paradise.” - Thoreau
Or those of us that simply didn't like it. That was the most excited I have ever been for a Bond film. Walked in expecting another incredible outing and was seriously disappointed in the end result. I wanted to love it so much that I saw it five times in theaters in a week or two period, but it wasn't for me.
I only got to see that one twice. Was hoping for a few more viewings, but it started to set in after that second viewing that it was likely the same scenario as SF, and I needn't waste any more time or money rushing to see what was likely another dud for me when it'd be available on blu-ray in a few months time.
Okay well that’s nonsense because I liked it both times I saw it in the theatre. It’s only afterwards that the films flaws set in and really affected its viewing ability. It seems to be a film designed for a one time fun viewing and nothing else.
That was the same for me! Went into my first viewing really stoked that I as going to see a great classic Bond movie! When end credits rolled I was very glum(as were the audience who were with me... very subdued leaving!)
I thought "No I must be missing something'
Saw it 3 more times I believe in cinema.. it didn't get any better.
My feeling now is that I admire it and I really want to like it but it will never be an instant choice for me when I want my Bond fix.
Still love Craig as Bond and happy he is doing Bond 25 but I don't want a repeat of SF in any way. But I have a feeling we will with Boyle at the helm.
This goes for both my cinema experiences with SF/SP. No one I've talked to seemed to like SF/SP, and many commented on how boring both were, compared to the recent M:I films.
Not that the two films are exactly similar, but OHMSS likely had the same effect on audiences. Let's face it. neither film is uplifting at the end, though SF has some denouement.
Have experienced laughter when watching comedies at the cinema, but that's about it. People are generally quiet at the cinema here - if you don't count the unnecessary snack eating. There are 20+ hours of the day you can eat (as loudly as you want), yet they choose to do so at a place where you want people to be silent.
most people I know or people who were at screening of SF were quite subdued about it!
(Regarding Kincaid, the biggest laugh was for "welcome to Scotland!"! Other than that I don't recall much enthusiasm from anyone!)
Forgot about the fiddling of phones; that is present at any culture these days. In general Norwegians are a bit quiet, except when drunk, of course. No one is louder than drunk ones - and that's not in a fun way.
There was also this one incident when I watched Inglourious Basterds at the cinema, where a group of people left after about 45 mins in. Could hear them talking to themselves as they left, saying something like: «Shit movie. I didn't pay to watch them just talk to each other.»
http://www.dailyedge.ie/skyfall-uk-biggest-film-daniel-craig-007-uk-box-office-702474-Dec2012/
Shocking! I was so engrossed during moments in that film that I couldn't imagine walking out!
+1. Very similar to my thoughts. I also left thinking something was missing and can't figure why so many non-fans/critics find it classic and satisfying whereas CR fit that so much better.
And say what you want about Bonds not being action movies, there isn't anything in this film that stands out in that department, much like its predecessor it resembles in many ways - TWINE.
I don't even bother watching all of SF on Blu these days, just certain sequences such as Silva's entrance and speech.
They went just as the movie really took off, which I found quite funny. Obvious they expected it to be a generic action popcorn flick!
That's my favourite part too! And when Bond turns the tables on his captors after Severines death, it was the only time I got excited, apart from the pts. Other than that I just find it dull. And No, it was nothing to do with patriotism, that never bothers me, I like Bonds Britishness. It's just nowhere near the masterpiece it's made out to be!
Oh, and maybe I should put this in the controversial section but I don't get the love for Roger Deakin either. There are sections that are impressive in SF, but mostly I find his work ordinary (particularly interior parts!)
The best Bond films are generally not full of action. They're full of intrigue. I would argue that DN, FRWL, GF, and TB contain little action until the very end. And the action sequences that do exist are usually brief. I liken the pace and tone of SF to that of TB. Neither film is heavy on action, meaning neither is reliant on it, either.
If there are any flaws in CR, it's in the laborious, drawn-out action sequences in the first half: construction site-embassy, Miami airport. The better parts of that film take place during poker, where the tension is psychological. SF tapped more into the psychological and other than the PTS and end at Skyfall, let the action take a back seat. After QoS, it was a breath of fresh air.
It's not the lack of action that I have a problem with! LTK is one of my favourite Bonds and it has only 3 major action set pieces incl pts. But it's storyline is gripping following Bonds dogged determination to destroy Sanchez organisation.I don't feel SF grips enough and it doesn't have any major set pieces to fall back on!
I agree on CR. Love the quieter scenes, with Vesper, the poker scenes etc.
And some of my favourite sections in QOS are not the action but the dramatic moments , Whites interrogation , Bonds scenes with Mathis and with Camille finale with Yusef!
SF just doesn't give me any real sections like that that l look forward to when watching it!
Very much at his best! A top three of his, if you ask me!
You can understand some audiences not liking the more lengthy dialogue parts, but even the regular movie goers should at this point be aware of this with Tarantino's films. The dialogue is always referred to in reviews, too.
That's a shame, really. The overall lack of consideration to other movie goers who actually want to see the film undisturbed, is one of the reasons I rarely see films at the cinema. What I miss from watching the film on a much smaller screen at home, I gain in the knowledge that I can watch the film in peace, not having to worry about disturbing noises, talking, etc.
It's the one highlight of the local Alamo Drafthouse theater for me: they have ZERO tolerance for talking and cell phone usage. If you see someone doing either, you throw up a card with your complaint, they keep an eye out, issue a warning, and if it happens again, they're thrown out, no refund.