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
A great Bond film to be sure
I knew you would love it :)
Welcome to the club of SP fans.
SF pales in comparison.
Craig finally arrived at Connery level.
Bravo EON for realising this kind of movie was long overdue.
Its really good to read posts here from members that have really enjoyed the film.
I thought it was a bloody good film as well..........i just can't understand the negativity from some reviewers!.......well its their loss!
Oh dear..........maybe you were too tired from all your work to enjoy the film?
@Daltoncraig's account has been hacked I see ;)
I will write again as soon as I see it a 2nd time to give you my detailed thoughts.
I had the strong feeling that they took certain parts and glued them in no order, the movie didn't flow well. I understand they wanted a more "Bondian" movie, but it was wrong executed. I don't compare it with Skyfall or any other DC Bond, even as a standalone film, it is a bit of a mess.
If only they could expand the ideas and make two films...
To start, the MI6 team that has been established is by far my favorite out of the entire franchise thus far. Although I miss Judi Dench, Ralph Fiennes is a classic M that reminds me of the 60's Bond films. He's strict, authoritative, and seemingly respectable as well, and above all protective of the double-oh section when threatened by C. We got Tanner; Rory Kinnear who despite having a small role, it would seem odd if he wasn't in these films. Since QoS he's become a major figure of this MI6 world and it's great seeing him as just another ally to Bond and MI6 as a whole. Naomie Harris is absolutely stunning and I really love her portrayal of Moneypenny. She has great onscreen chemistry with Craig that has carried over from Skyfall, and I love how their relationship in the film reaches beyond co-workers and in to friendship territory. Then there's Ben Whishaw who has utterly owned the role of Q. He's part mad professor, part hacker, part quirky computer nerd, and all in all genius. The love-hate relationship he portrays towards Bond is priceless, and the genuine care for his job that he makes known to the audience is great. Another well done onscreen relationship with Craig. The direction the franchise has taken with Bond’s home base more involved than ever really adds depth and story to these films. I hope these actors and actresse(s) are here to stay for quite some time.
On to the lead female... Lea Seydoux as Madeleine Swan. There’s something about her that is playful, something that is alluring, something that is tough, and unfortunately something that is out of place that I can’t quite define. For a Bond girl, her character is pretty, but not stunning/glamorous like they’ve always meant to be. With that being said I think Seydoux herself is a very attractive girl. Her character had so much more potential in more than one way, but I guess plain is what they were going for. I loved the entire scene when her and Bond arrive at the L'American Hotel and she gets a bit tipsy. Something about her playful demeanor in this scene stood out to me, and Bond’s sarcastic reaction to it had me snickering. The way she and Bond hit it off after a while was just excellent. They’re chemistry in the film was nearly comparable to that of Bond and Vesper in Casino Royale, but this time he didn’t get betrayed at least...
I remember some time after Skyfall came out I was watching what I think was the Oscars and Christoph Waltz won for something I don’t remember. Since us Bond fans are very good at picking out people we think would be excellent as Bond villains, I deliberately remember thinking to myself as I watched him accept his award that he’d be a great Bond villain. He’d be great as someone untouchable. A leader of an organization, if you will. Fast forward a couple years later and he’s being cast in SPECTRE as Oberhauser which ironically enough translates to “Head of House”. A leader... So of course I was excited... I thought Waltz was excellent in the film. The first time I saw him appear at the meeting in Rome I almost feared for the other SPECTRE members as you could tell that they fear him. The way he talks and handles himself easily exudes something sinister, and I love the way he attempts to get inside of Bond’s head (literally). I certainly hope to see him in the next film, especially if Daniel Craig returns. His character needs to be explored much more especially since he’s the main baddy behind Craig’s era...
And that brings me to the main attraction... From the very moment Craig appears onscreen the first word I thought of was "swagger". He oozes a certain confidence this time around that hasn’t been present in his era, and clearly is at his best opposed to the previous three, and his previous three were all amazing with the exception of QoS which was slightly greater than mediocre. His one-liners are excellent, his dry humor is sensational, and his smoothness is unmatched. He is still in great shape, still handsome and rugged, and still a very convincing assassin. Serious when he needs to be, humorous when he deems it necessary; suave with little effort, and most importantly always tough. There’s a specific shot of him in the film that really stood out to me that absolutely defines the character of 007. It occurs when Monica Bellucci’s character is standing in the yard of her villa over the pool. Suddenly the camera peers over her shoulder and Craig starts approaching all dressed in a sleek, black Tom Ford suit with leather gloves, unscrewing a suppressor from his Walther PPK. He then whispers to her “what a lovely view” as he nonchalantly just killed two hitmen. It was the small things and the little touches like this that made me fall in love with this film. Bottom line is Craig can pretty much do no wrong in this role; end of story...
The first thing I said after the first time I watched it is that it’s the type of movie you just don’t want to end because it is truly THAT entertaining. Even after a third sitting I’m left wanting more not only because it was awesome, but also because we don’t know if this is Craig’s last Bond film or not, and I simply can’t get enough of him in this role. I’ve said it before; I want Craig to play 007 forever but I know that is unrealistic. If he does one more I’ll be more than satisfied, but I need to be prepared ahead of time so I can really cherish/appreciate his final film. Let’s all hope it doesn’t end here as this film feels more like the beginning of something rather than the conclusion of a story. The gun-barrel was where it belongs, the classic elements are back, the gadgets are there, Christoph Waltz’ character was given an origin story, and Craig is officially Bond... James Bond.
I still would have preferred it to have been darker and more serious but the humour in this film was better written I felt than what was done with SF. My only other major gripe is that it was a shame that they didn't develop the two Bond girl's characters more and the villain's. I would have liked Bond to have stayed at the villain's headquarters for longer in the last half of the film too. Felt a bit rushed.
Not much plot but then Bond films have never been known for great plots. Overall, a good Bond film. I will see it again in a couple of weeks. Maybe then I will be able to decide as to whether I think it's better than SF. It's certainly better than QOS but CR is still my favourite Craig Bond film.
I totally agree here. I think they may have had something else planned for that lair but perhaps budget issues got in the way. They went to a lot of effort to construct it and then didn't do all that much with it. I agree also on the two female characters......since we didn't have 'Dench's M' in this film, I think they did need to forge more of a connection with the female leads....a missed opportunity imho, and the film would have been much stronger for it.
Yeah, I don't get it. The lair in QOS was destroyed in double quick time too. I miss the days of Dr. No, YOLT, OHMSS and TSWLM. Not that I was around then. Well, I was born the year the latter, came out. :)
The films are just so fast paced these days. It's a shame.
I think it's a good film but not a great one. It had the potential to be the latter.
I didn't mind too much waiting longer to see the film as this preserves the excitement one feels when a new Bond film or book comes out. :)
Oh, another thing I wanted to add is that I think Harris's Penny was much better in this film than she was in SF. Perhaps in part due to Mendes's good direction. One can easily see the changes he made between the clips in the trailers and what was in the final film. The way in which Bond, Penny and the villain delivered the odd line had been changed in tone which was a very good move. They were much better in the final film.
Regarding keeping Craig's face blurred - honestly I wasn't aware at first that it was him, so I realize why they wanted to do that, but I didn't quite like that scene because I would have actually preferred to see it all unfold without the blurriness so as to more enjoy his dispatching the two assassins. So a different viewpoint would have suited me better personally. This scene had sort of a QoS Tosca element to it (artsy, with the music etc.).
My own thoughts on SPECTRE lean towards disappointment. Not totally unexpected, given the three great previous episodes (they really do feel like episodes now, don't they?)
Seems like the "third picture" rule is back in effect: Connery's high mark being Goldfinger, Moore's top outing being The Spy Who Loved Me, and now Craig's best would seem to be Skyfall. (Only Brosnan doesn't seem to fit the mold, as I think Tomorrow Never Dies beats The World Is Not Enough.)
Having said all this, yes, I did enjoy seeing SPECTRE on opening night with a large group of friends, although the experience of getting thirty people to an IMAX theater to see the new Bond movie overshadowed the film itself. (I'm sure for many of us, the anticipation of going on opening night is part of the fun of it...it's been a tradition of mine since 1977.)
Out of the thirty of us, probably half thought that the movie was great, the other half thought that it was too long, or too predictable, or too full of unnecessary humour. Hard to disagree with all of these points.
Regardless, I still give a lot of credit to Michael Wilson and Barbara Broccoli for keeping at it, and continuing Cubby's mission to deliver first-rate entertainment every two years or so. They could rest on their laurels of course, but instead they choose to carry on, and I find that very admirable. Each and every Bond movie has indeed been first-rate entertainment. (No matter how much we love to pick them apart.)
Bond will return. It's a given. I can only hope the next one is not so much of a tribute to previous entries, and instead concentrates on developing a relevant story that fits in with our stressful, anti-terrorism times (the SPECTRE organization itself plays to that premise very well.) I can appreciate the whole homage thing, but they did that once before with Die Another Day. Let's hope that originality returns front and center. And that the scriptwriters tighten things up a bit (they could have used Mr. Wilson's own impressive writing skills this last time - think of his contributions to For Your Eyes Only and Licence To Kill.) Otherwise, we may end up with yet another cobbled-together reflection of Bond's glory days past. A conglomerate of everything we've seen before. That has gotten tiresome.
If they do (foolishly) continue in the same repetitive direction, perhaps they could incorporate the name of every previous James Bond film into one single title:
Die love secret die, never say live only tomorrow; you are your gun licence eyes, let me live enough for Moonraker; Goldfinger only dies twice, Dr. No is forever living on the world with her majesty’s royale diamonds and a quantum of Octopussy from Russia, never to kill the casino service man with the goldeneye, never to view a Skyfall day; the daylights again kill the golden solace for another spy who loved Thunderball, not Spectre.