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
So what were the major differences? In the longer cut (not the 4 hours one) we actually briefly saw William Wallace. One less battle sequence was also cut, along with Pine and Pugh's romance. Trims were made to almost every scene to quicken up the pace.
@bondjames
Thank you, sir. I reciprocate the sentiment.
I'm rather interested in these news bits about QT being signed on for a Star Trek movie. Twenty years ago, regardless of the tragic state the Trek films were in, I would've said no. But then, he was known back then for more or less one type of films. He has since been venturing outward, though I still think he's got a big challenge left: cut on dialogue. I'd love to see a Star Trek film made by Quentin, but I expect some action besides dialogue. ;)
Hell, if he pulls off a Trek film well, I'd be in favour of a QT Bond film!
And I mean that unironically!
Regarding TLJ, like you I'm not as negative about it as many fans. I'm not really a hardcore SW fan though, having come to the series much later during the prequels - truth be told I think I prefer space horror films to space adventure ones. Having said that, I enjoyed it, but agree with your point about it changing directions unnecessarily and without consequence. It was almost as though Johnson was going out of his way to blow expectations up but didn't fill the resultant space he created with anything worthwhile. So as you noted, we're left with frustrations and more questions than answers. I still believe that JJ will wrap this trilogy up nicely with the next one though - the expectations are low enough for that. My biggest beef with the film was actually the overt (for me) PC pandering, which is something I saw in JW2 as well. It's like a sledgehammer to the face, and takes me out of the film. I wish Hollywood would give it a break for while rather than shoving it down our throats in entertainment vehicles, as they've been doing lately.
--
I watched this for the first time about a year ago when it was released on blu ray. I really enjoyed it too. A not too well known early Ford gem with great performances by everyone.
@bondjames
"JW2" as in John Wick 2? Heck, people can cast Ruby Rose anytime they want. I think she's pretty hot in that film. ;)
Yeah, Disney (and others) are stretching this PC thing beyond reasonable proportions. Many it's not even about being PC as such; they're just trying to play it ridiculously safe. Everything pertaining to race and gender is being balanced out to where it becomes annoying. The most un-PC thing people can do, in my opinion, is to cast actors and actresses to meet certain quota rather than for their talents.
I completely agree on the quota thing. I've never been a fan of this idea. Kevin Feige actually commented on that recently with respect to the next phase of the MCU. He said it's a worthwhile thing to consider and strive for where possible, but didn't seem like he was in favour of it being mandatory. I agree.
EDIT: What were your thoughts on it @mattjoes?
That's a good thing at least.
I mean, imagine you're a filmmaker in this day age, constantly having to pop your head over the trenches to see if it's okay to drop a certain line in your film or to cast a certain actor/actress.
Here's my suggestion. We have the MPAA's rating system, right? Let's do something similar. Let's warn people. "This film is PC" or "This film is un-PC" and from there on, it's our own problem and our own choice. If I'm okay with being insulted, stereotyped, mocked, ... , I can watch a good, old-fashioned "un-PC" movie and enjoy it. But if some bottom pinching renders you livid, well then you can choose to stay away from the film.
The only possible issue I see is that a lot of this may in fact be market driven. There does appear to be a large segment of the viewing public (usually younger) that is particularly prone to taking offense at the slightest thing, and may perhaps want society as depicted in movies to be closer to some utopian ideal. Either that or film makers believe that they feel that way and are pandering to them. With the increasing cost of making a film and distributing it, I can see why they err on the side of caution. Eventually it will affect Bond and Tarantino films I'm sure.
I suppose the only way to know is to try some sort of rating system and see whether films suffer at the box office or thrive with an un-PC structure.
Nowadays, people have opinions like chewing gum; always in their pocket, in large quantities, often blown up, yet soiling the very ground (i.e. Internet) we all must walk on. And they are "liked" for it. So, every next Bond film will suffer impossible scrutiny from the Knights of PolCorr; and the smallest hint at gender bias or whatever will inevitably result in the film falling victim to the infamous Internet defecation treatment.
Luckily, I myself couldn't care less about Facebook or Twitter; I have real friends and I prefer to make up my own mind, so the social masturbation that are these two despicable media comes nowhere near my private life. But I'm sure EON is very sensitive about not upsetting too large a segment of their target demographic. Hence my fear that the Bond formula will be diluted and diluted more, until all the spice, salt and alcohol has gotten too thinly spread to be tasted anymore.
We shall then group in secret, underground cabals of Bond fans, using quotes from Diamonds Are Forever as passwords and watching the uncensored versions of GF and OP. ;)
@bondjames I enjoyed it quite a bit. I am not particularly interested in Westerns myself, though I must admit over the years I've gradually warmed up more to their particular qualities. But beyond genre, with The Hateful Eight, I found the film succeeded first and foremost at creating great anticipation, tension and interest through very delicate and precise pacing of dialogue. I also considered the situation of isolation in which the characters find themselves to be compelling, and the actors lively and interesting. The tone of the film was not only morally ambiguous, but also very, very cruel, which I found strangely refreshing. It was, I suppose, evocative of some of the European films which have inspired Tarantino's work. There was something cathartic about the movie's sense of latent brutality, later to be realized, of course. To be perfectly honest, I've only seen parts of Django and Inglourious, so I couldn't compare the film with those, but I did greatly prefer it to Pulp Fiction. The cinematography and music score were also exquisite.
I shall watch the other two Tarantino films I mention one of these days.
I hope you like IB and DU. I much prefer the former, but really liked the latter too (despite it being a Western). It has excellent standout performances by Leonardo DiCaprio and Christoph Waltz in particular.
I was like you, @bondjames on my first viewing of The Hateful Eight i liked it but it didn't blow me away. Watching it a second time though and it improved massively. I was the same with Inglorious Basterds. Love them both now.
What an incredible collection of films Tarantino is creating.
I agree on his output. It's an exceptional batting average overall. One of the best working today. The only other contemporary director who gets me so excited when he announces a film is Christopher Nolan.
Well, those are 3 of my favourite films ever :) Glad you liked it.
I would add Villeneuve.
Watching in tribute to the great Stan Lee
Still one of the greatest Superhero movies for me.
Had this on the "must see" list of mine for a while now; I've heard it discussed as one of the greats more and more over the last few years, and now that I finally got a chance to see it (on YouTube, no less, in rather solid quality), I'm amazed and heartbroken all at once, which I can only surmise is the set of emotions the director was going for. It's a simple story in post-war Rome about a poor man and his family trying to survive. After the husband manages to get a job, which requires a bicycle, his wife is kind enough to sell their fine linen sheets and acquire one for him. Sure enough, while working one day (hanging up movie posters around Rome - actually sounds like fun), his bike is stolen. Over the next 24 hours, he and his son Bruno (what a first-time role this was) travel the streets in hopes of finding the thief and/or the bicycle.
Halfway through, I reflected on the title and began to realize more and more where this one was going. You can really see as the running time passes just how more and more frantic and desperate the man becomes, and how dire his situation will be without that bike, to the point they can't even eat and will likely die. I'm no wordsmith when it comes to film review, but I really loved this one, despite the sadness of the ending and the neorealism of it all. I also thought the balance between the two "thief" scenes was noteworthy: Antonio's bike is stolen in broad daylight amongst hundreds of people and he barely receives help from a passerby in a car; Antonio steals a bike in broad daylights amongst hundreds of people and almost everyone manages to join in, immediately stop him, and attempt to run him off to jail. What a film.
Everyone needs to see this, the technical achievments are astounding and Peter Jackson and Co have done wonders.
It starts out quite lighthearted in the first segment of the film which is in B/W but when the film switches to colour, incredibly impressively considering the dirty word colourisation has been in the past, the detached feeling of watching stock vintage B/W footage is totally removed and it's so much more real in colour and that more harrowing to watch and Jackson is not holding back on the horrors of trench war fare.
The voice overs used show men talking about their experiences with warmth and humour, the sheer cheerful sounds of their voice when sometimes talking about the most horrible things is a testament to their resilience.
I'm not going to say it's thorougly enjoyable but it's fascinating, emotional and shocking and as I said everyone should see this if only to realise the sacrifices that were made and make us realise how lucky we are to live in the times we do. Just a shame the human race doesn't seem to have learned from it's mistakes.
As powerful and effective as the likes of Shindlers List and unlike that no Hollywood like devices used to give it a thrilling element that he most definitely doesn't need. Just the images and those voices make the time spent worthwhile but certainly not one you are likely to forget for sometime.
5/5
Watched it on BBC 2 last night. Found it totally fascinating and that moment where the black and white footage adjusts its frame rate and the colour begins to seep in will make the hairs on your neck stand up.
Unfortunately, I am seeing a lot of detractors of it on social media but for me, it was a very powerful experience. Jackson's aim was to get people talking about the horrors of WWI for the boys in the dirt and I think he nailed it.
I can’t quite articulate why I liked it though, it just gripped me the whole way through, I can’t point out specific things the film did exceptionally, but something just worked as a whole for me I guess
Easily the most unlikeable protagonist that Mark Wahlberg has ever played, and that's going some. A bizarre, fascinating mess; At the moment, I'm considering it a "so bad it's good" experience, but in reality I know it's just plain bad.
SPIDER-MAN
Like many others, I'm doing this in honour of the great Stan Lee. I hadn't seen it in a few years though, so it gave me great enjoyment. I vividly remember seeing it as an excited eleven year old whose only real comic-book love was Batman at the time, and being instantly smitten with Spidey.
Excelsior.
What accent does he have in it ? Not American surely .