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
Man, if I lived near you, we'd have a drink and a cigar, @Birdleson my friend. I absolutely, wholeheartedly agree with you.
I believe you're a huge Brosnsn fan, right? After watching NTTD I watched DAD just to make me feel better. DAD is still a silly and heavily flawed film but it's certainly more enjoyable than NTTD (I can't believe I'm typing this). I sense the Brosnan era is going to receive a fond reappraisal.
I was annoyed by the use of WHATTITW by the end credits too. I don't want that song from a brilliant movie associated with this garbage.
It was a cheap shot, hanging on the coat tails of a classic, something this film aspires to be but falls way short of the mark. I honestly thought they were going to go back to Fleming with this one, instead of that garbage they drew up instead (no doubt done by a box-ticking committee).
I'm in Upstate NY, rural community and I love it. Quiet, community, people don't act so PC, and just are themselves. When not working I find myself chatting with my old friends and indulging in classic movies and music.
Back to Bond- I'm hoping there is a bit of sexiness in this film. I don't expect to see Bond getting laid much. For that I can always watch Connery in TB, or even more so, NSNA.
These are spot on. Agree on everything. They aped a 1969 film that had more soul and heart than everything they did with this one. Shame on them. Fan service? Not for this fan.
That's how it felt watching it. Craig and Babs pushing their own agendas to indulge in their own fantasies, at the expense of anything that Fleming ever wrote.
If Babs and Wilson quit now and hand the baton over to someone else, that is the only thing that would make me optimistic for the next film, and the survival of the franchise. It desperately needs new blood.
I do hope that's the case.
Hear, hear. And just have him show up and say: "The rumours of my death have been greatly exaggerated". Just for the sake of fun.
They could simply nod to SKYFALL by having the villain of B26 say "....and what's your hobby?"
In a way, yes. I thought DAD was laughably bad, but I didn't come out of the cinema angry when I saw that mess.
But last night I came out fuming. I guess the Craig films have led me down a path that I thought we were going down. Back to the Dalton era, going back to the Fleming novels.
And this is because the promise that was shown with CR, and made me think every film that followed would be like this.
After last night, boy was I wrong yet again. Only this time I feel far more let down.
100%. My feeling is that I can appreciate the artistry, I can tolerate the melodrama, I don't have a problem with any of the apparently controversial points, there was plenty to enjoy, and I even laughed out loud when M said "FFS". However coming out, I was left feeling "well there's some good stuff, but I'm pissed off and a made to feel melancholy about the difficulty of finding a pathway to true happiness." At the risk of sounding self-indulgent, that's how I feel every other day of the ###%ing week, and was hoping a Bond film would make me feeling like punching the air and going straight back in. Cheers!
Is there anything in the Craig era that any future filmmaker can call back, the way this film (and the whole Craig era) does with WHATTITW, the cars and many other things?
This isn't supposed to be a massive knock or anything. I am just stuck on this idea of Craig's era being this seperate thing that then constantly works off of and references the things that have come before and incorporates them to enhance the things that are inherent in the film itself. But does it leave anything that could maybe be called back later?
Iconic car: DB5, I don't think a lot of people will clamor for a return of the classic DBS ^^
Music: I'm not a massive score guy, but in NTTD they work a lot to make WHATTITW an iconic song, but it already is that and because of another movie.
Settings: Skyfall, maybe but they blew that one up. Safin's base could be an ultra-meta call-back in 30 years or something, but that is really stretching it, plus "island bunker" is already a classic trope. Maybe the underground MI6 in SF?
Not that every Bond needs to re-invent the wheel, quite the contrary. But the various eras leave their mark and right now it kind of feels a bit like this one was so backwards looking, that there isn't all that much to be called back to. Which is nuts, now that I write it down, because it is such a specific seperate thing that I am sure will leave a huge mark on the franchise and the fandom, but maybe more internal than in external things we can see and name and make lists and elimination games about.
Villains: Not the greatest slate. Silva and Le Chiffre are the stand-outs, but not something you could take further per se. Waltz-Blofeld is a minefield right now, but of course already a call-back itself.
Misc: Will Bond
Only if it was true to something written by its original creator Ian Fleming, and not something dreamt up by the indulgence of a lead actor, a female producer who is ashamed of anything Fleming wrote, and instead listens to the latest team of tick-boxing, PC correct, snowflake trendy writers, brought up on cheap Netflix dramas.
The Flemimg ending of YOLT being used as Craig’s end would have been unsatisfying for me. I’d rather he do TMWTGG as the capper. Besides, I don’t believe in being slavish to Fleming and Cubby. Allow future filmmakers to do their own thing.
Even Cubby was guilty of going astray from Fleming, and thank goodness because that gave us MOONRAKER.
Agreed. Do something drastic too to really differentiate the new era.
Yes... you could argue the decision was morally indefensible. However, Barbara Broccoli is a smart , cunning lady. She is fully aware casual fans/general film goers will be in the queue for Bond 26. They won't care if Bond is dead because they have no emotional connection to the character. Next week they'll see Venom 2 or Dune or whatever and they'll forget Bond is dead. And three years later (maybe, if Amazon want a quick return on their investment) the first Bond 26 teaser trailer drops and it's rebooted Bond and 80 percent or more of the global film-going audience will say "Bond is back!" They'll get excited for a day or so then forget about it until the next trailer comes along.
The recent "Bond should be a woman" debate/bandwagon is due to zero emotional connection to the character. Anyone with a strong emotional connection to James Bond will know he is a middle class/upper middle class white man with a privileged education. There is no debate. But when you have little or no emotional connection to the character, he's just another action hero that should be deconstructed or reinvented.