Register  |   Log In  |  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter    
Follow us on   
Search   
Forum Home Register for Free! Log In Moderator Tickets FAQ Users Online

RE: Bond back on top (no shagging pun intended)

 
Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: Bond back on top (no shagging pun intended) Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Bond back on top (no shagging pun intended) - 26/10/2012 6:24:10 PM   
Deviation


Posts: 27284
Joined: 2/6/2006
From: Enemies of Film HQ

quote:

ORIGINAL: manwihtheplan

Deviation wrote:

"Oh and you know what you sound like right now? Kyle's mum. "Guys, it's ok to do all the horrific violence you want to do, but say no naughty words".

Yeah, well, your signature quote isn't exactly charming or clever so you'll have to forgive me for disagreeing with your comments about swearing in Bond films! Sarcasm meant.



What sarcasm?

Oh and you still haven't argued WHY it is ok to have people eaten by sharks, have his wife killed and then maim his legs by feeding them to a shark, torture somebody by smashing his balls, throw somebody of big dish and show his falling or have a group of people being shot while the villian laughs maniacally or even better, HAS SEXUAL SATISFACTION, have them ripped apart, shock them to bits, burn them alive, etc... is ok, but saying fuck? OH GOD NO WHY WON'T ANYONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN

_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dpp1978
There are certainly times where calling a person a cunt is not only reasonable, it is a gross understatement.

quote:


ORIGINAL: elab49
I really wish I could go down to see Privates

(in reply to manwihtheplan)
Post #: 61
RE: Skyfall - 26/10/2012 7:32:45 PM   
R W

 

Posts: 335
Joined: 23/6/2006
Having mightily impressed everyone with his portrayal of the most famous spy of all, James Bond, Daniel Craig with his blond hair and sexy chest that matches Ursula Andress, succeeds after the initial backlash of his casting by capturing the true essence of Ian Fleming’s 00 agent. Following Craig’s first great outing in Casino Royale, making him the best Bond ever, even outdoing Sean Connery, it was a real disappointment that Quantum of Solace couldn’t match what its predecessor achieved. Four years have passed and following MGM’s financial troubles, what better way to celebrate the cinematic Bond’s 50th anniversary than Oscar-winning director Sam Mendes helming the long awaited twenty-third instalment.

After the incomprehensible Quantum of Solace, the plot of Skyfall is refreshingly simple. Following a disastrous operation on Istanbul, James Bond is missing and presumed to be dead, and the identities of every active undercover MI6 agent are leaked onto the internet. When a terrorist attack took place in the headquarters of MI6, Bond returns to service and now must face an enemy from M’s (Judi Dench) past, in the shape of Raoul Silva (Javier Bardem).

Given that Bond has been a cinematic hero in the past fifty years, everyone ought to know the mechanics of how a Bond film works, such as Q’s gadgets, and the fine figured women and a dastardly villain. With regular Bond writers Neal Purvis and Robert Wade, along with franchise newcomer John Logan, the story of Skyfall is a blend of the old and new, as for example there is a newly-interpreted Q (played into witty fashion by Ben Whishaw) who presents a newly-designed Walther, the film changes the game from what we usually expect from Bond. As the story progresses with the usual routine of Bond on a mission, in a luscious casino and having hot shower sex, Skyfall takes a more personal turn as the story is intimately about our hero, our villain and the true Bond girl of the piece: M.

Starting the film with Bond presumed dead and coming back to a brave new world, he is seen as a broken man and even though he is reporting to duty, there is still damage to him, physically and emotionally. Craig completely pulls of this battered aspect of his character and even rocking a rugged beard that is more convincing than Pierce Brosnan’s tramped look from Die Another Day. Following his Oscar-winning performance from No Country for Old Men, if you see Javier Bardem in a strange hairdo, do expect a great villain and Skyfall is no exception. With his blonde hair and flamboyant charisma, Bardem’s Silva is a Hannibal Lecter for the internet generation, who in one key scene, has a creepy “mommy-dearest” confrontation with M. Rivalling Craig’s performance, Bardem as one of the best Bond baddies is up there with Heath Ledger’s extraordinary acting as the Joker.

If there is a criticism that needs to be said, it is perhaps the inclusion of the new two Bond girls. Despite a seductive sequence with Craig from each of the two female leads, Naomie Harris doesn’t quite have the snappy chemistry with Bond in the same way that Eva Green’s Vesper Lynd did, while Bérénice Marlohe who although has the more interesting role, is lacking enough screen time to support her. However as I have said before, Judi Dench’s M is at the centre of the film as at its heart is her relationship with 007 as if she is a struggling mother to him.

Known for directing intimate character dramas from American Beauty to Revolutionary Road, Sam Mendes’ first entry into action-adventure is one of pure spectacle. With his love of Bond and presenting clever homages to the series before, Mendes has changed the concept of a Bond film, in the same way that Christopher Nolan’s The Dark Knight changed the mechanics of a superhero film. Given the impressive action sequences (although not as tough as Casino Royale) such as a haunted house-styled climax, along with the stunning cinematography by Roger Deakins, the Brit director never forgets the drama and brings out the best of his actors, in particular Craig and Dench.

Five decades have passed and James Bond still knows how to shake a martini, as Mendes’ spectacular combination of old and new elements, brings out the very best of the franchise. If you really want to honour Bond’s 50th anniversary, do see Skyfall in your nearest IMAX screen. Welcome back, Mr Bond!

< Message edited by R W -- 24/11/2012 4:18:49 PM >

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 62
RE: Bond back on top (no shagging pun intended) - 26/10/2012 7:33:51 PM   
matty_b


Posts: 14520
Joined: 19/10/2005
From: Outpost 31 calling McMurtle.
It's great. A really, really strong addition to the Bond cycle, and one that both celebrates the series past (plenty of nice little musical cues, clever bits of dialogue that refer to previous titles without turning round and giving a big Roger Moore-sized wink to the audience, and bits of character bits and action that hit the same note) and strikes a blow for its future. It's a film that seamlessly steps over the wobble that was Quantum of Solace and establishes Bond as a character that can still function in the 21st century. The fact it does that while exploring his personal history to an extent not seen before is further evidence of the strength of the story they're playing with here.

There's one big flaw, which is that the secondary Bond girl is fairly useless and drags the pace of the film down once she's introduced. You could easily excise her scenes, lop 20 minutes off the running time, not interfere with the plot too much and have a better film at the end of it.

But still, that's honestly the only flaw I can think of right now. Craig is immeasurably confident in the role, Bardem is a queasily creepy villain, the elevation of Dench's M to a true supporting character works better than it should and the introduction of Ben Wishaw's nerdy Will-from-The-Inbetweeners Q has bags of potential. They don't get much to do together, but he and Craig spark pretty quickly off one another.

Deakins obviously makes the film look good and my worry about Mendes (who made a war film without any fighting and turned Road to Perdition pretty bloodless) is unfounded - the action is sure-footed, smooth when it needs to be, and punchy when it needs to be. He does indulge himself in the odd moment of art-deco surrealism (a punch-up with Bond and his antagonist framed as silhouettes against a backdrop of moving and whirling neon figures), but gets away with it, as does the decision to start the action in the most glamorous of locations and gradually dial it down to the most homely and ordinary.

There are undoubtedly moments that will make the Bond bores wail and moan, but who cares, they're whining brats who can fuck off. What you've got here is a film that builds up to a final scene that, as predictable as it is, if it doesn't make you want to punch the air at the end then I'd question whether you're a true Bond fan at all. Hell, even Adele works in the context of the film.


_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze
Mattyb is a shining example of what the perfect Empire Forum member is.


(in reply to Deviation)
Post #: 63
RE: Skyfall - 26/10/2012 7:44:37 PM   
demoncleaner


Posts: 2378
Joined: 3/10/2005
From: Belfast
I thought it was thoroughly decent. Although with Bond "thoroughly decent" as a summation could be faint praise. Skyfall is undoubtedly one of the worthiest entries in all 50 years of Bond but it wasn't assured as the most enjoyable of any era. To me it felt a bit flat the whole way through, but it also felt worthy the whole way through. It's a trade off between guilty thrills and heavy-lidded professionalism and I think Bond 23 comes down in favour of the latter. The wonderful thing about it though is that the final third is extremely satisfying. It's still understated but at no point are we in the vicinity of anti-climax. I loved the final third. Bond films are supposed to end in sexy foreign locations. This is an opposite to that. A lusciously gothic wallow in October's autumnal sweep. Something to cure you of your seasonal affected disorder and it suddenly becomes the definitive Bond to watch at Christmas.

I have no doubt Mendes would very probably own to the fact that he'll never be "Mr. Action Director" but here's he savvy enough to a) concede that and b) find instead an atmosphere, or an arresting aesthetic, or both, for these set-pieces, it is atmosphere and visual couch in lieu of high octane ballet. The overall effect is a film with action that doesn't particularly "thrill" but a film that feels directed by one person. Casino Royale and Quantum both have a very conspicuous cut and paste feel from the second unit director. "We interrupt this film to bring you a set-piece" kind of vibe that is pleasingly absent here in the much more pleasingly fluent Skyfall.

In the small discussion yesterday porntrooper was talking about the Bond Begins vibe of the last two films here. He's absolutely right and Skyfall seems to go one further in it's fanboy (I am one) pleasing epilogue. So far this is a 3 film cycle of Bond Begins. The promise it gives at the end is that this could be proper old school, proper vintage in the immediate future, and I think Sam Mendes is the director to take it there. You know it'll be more From Russia with Love than Octopussy in his hands. The latter is infinitely more enjoyable but we've had the Brosnan years to ape that and I'm ready for it to get back to that slightly more "worthy" ambition again. This is great step in that direction.

4/5



< Message edited by demoncleaner -- 26/10/2012 7:53:45 PM >

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 64
RE: Bond back on top (no shagging pun intended) - 26/10/2012 7:49:17 PM   
demoncleaner


Posts: 2378
Joined: 3/10/2005
From: Belfast

quote:

ORIGINAL: matty_b

It's great. A really, really strong addition to the Bond cycle, and one that both celebrates the series past (plenty of nice little musical cues, clever bits of dialogue that refer to previous titles without turning round and giving a big Roger Moore-sized wink to the audience, and bits of character bits and action that hit the same note)


I'd also add to this one very subversive, veiled reference to the Goldfinger "lazer toward the nads" scene. (If people immediately know what I'm talking about, then those people are immediately gay )

(in reply to matty_b)
Post #: 65
RE: We take the plunge with Daniel once more!!! - 26/10/2012 9:52:13 PM   
talpacino


Posts: 3685
Joined: 15/11/2005
From: The Royal County
Loved it. Just the right amount of humour and nods to the older films. Good action, drama, threat and it looked great. I've heard complaints about the soundtrack but I really liked it.

Oh and that gun barrel shot thing at the end was amazing.

_____________________________

Currahee!

It's a different film. It's a very different film! It's a different shark!

Suppose I shot ya..How'd that be?

Post #: 66
RE: Skyfall - 26/10/2012 10:20:57 PM   
musht


Posts: 1860
Joined: 21/1/2009
From: Oireland
quote:

ORIGINAL: manwihtheplan

quote:

Why is it such a big issue?


Because it was meant to be at the start. What gives B Broccoli the right to put it at the end? Oh, because she inherited the franchise from her father! So that gives her the right to mess around with it. But as I say, it's meant to be at the start. The whole point of the gun barrel sequence is to tell the film going public you're about to watch a James Bond film, you're entering the Bond universe. It sets the tone. Without it you lose the tone. It starts like any other film. Why kill off the unique start to the James Bond films? It's moronic and disrespectful.



Yes!! Yes, that's exactly what gives her the right to make these decisions. What gives you the right, or in the words of Rod Kimble; "WHere do you get off?". Seriously, do you get angry about this because you're a "true fan", or are you a "true fan" because you get angry about these things.



quote:

ORIGINAL: evilpickle4

... did no-one else enjoy the opening of the film - replacing the gun barrel sequence with bond appearing at the end of the darkened corridor. I thought it was a clever replacement.



Yeh, I have to agree with you, I really liked it.

SPOILERS

I am surprised at how well this Bond movie is being received. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed it, but it completely ditches the Bond format of MI6 sending Bond on a mission to stop the bad guy, instead having the bad guy come after MI6. It worked very well.

That said, this film felt very much like a reboot of a reboot. It's mean mentioned that this film ignores/makes no reference to the events of CR or QoS and whilst some may not mind, it did bother me. I'm one of the few who like QoS, and I think it and it's predecessor did a fantastic job at bringing Bond back to basics. Skyfall in my opinion took a few steps towards undoing this. I don't mind references to the other movies but at times it reminded me too much of the Moore era. I think it also tried a little too hard to 'wipe the slate clean'. I understand that Dench is getting too old and have no problem with them replacing her but this seemed far too forced. As for the "revelation" of Eve's surname (as soon as she mentioned she was assistant to Mallory I knew the rumours had been true), talk about clunky. Really, they've never been introduced, it would have been so much better if their banter had been interrupted by M on the intercom (would have been a nice nod to the old Moneypenny days); "Ms Moneypenny, send Mr Bond in please" or something along those lines. It would have been far better than the introduction line.

I was also disappointed by the "home stretch", or what was essentially Bond does Home Alone. It was fun but I really wanted see Bond beat the shit out of Silva. For the first time in Craig's era we have a villain who can pose a physical threat to Bond (a villain who survived cyanide), and he's thwarted by a knife in the back.

I was disappointed. BUT I did enjoy it. I liked Silva and his plan, I do think Craig is a fantastic Bond and I'm looking forward to the next one. Four stars seems about right to me.


< Message edited by musht -- 26/10/2012 10:21:29 PM >


_____________________________

"SAVE ME, BARRY!!"

"What the hell are Regionals!?"

"color=#F1F1F1" Spoiler text "/color"

(in reply to manwihtheplan)
Post #: 67
RE: not quite as amazing as you're hoping - 27/10/2012 3:46:51 AM   
Coyleone


Posts: 566
Joined: 13/10/2008
Really looking forward to this. Hoping it is indeed 'the best Bond film ever' like some reviews have called it. I've never liked James Bond, and Casino Royale is the only Bond movie I even like in the slightest. Have never understood the love for the movies, some Connery ones have moments of goodness but ultimately have dated so badly and come off as cheesy (in a bad way) and dull with awful, awful action sequences, the Moore movies are seriously just bad, every one of them. Even when I was a kid I didn't like them, but pretended to because I thought it was 'cool' to like James Bond :D. I haven't seen the Lazenby or Dalton movies, and then the Brosnan ones range from poor to terrible. Casino Royale I liked, a breath of fresh air in the Bond franchise, Craig is great in the role, and the more serious and grittier tone is what I needed to get me into the franchise. Quantum Of Solace was bad and all over the place, but it had some decent action set pieces. Basically I think with the right mix of the new tone, with some humor added in and JAVIER BARDEM this new one could be the first Bond movie I legitimately really like. Of course I'm writing this before seeing it, so hey, I might not like it at all.

Sorry about that Just wanted to express my feelings on Bond.
Post #: 68
RE: IMAX - 27/10/2012 7:45:42 AM   
3wonders

 

Posts: 8
Joined: 19/1/2009
I didn't know that?!



< Message edited by 3wonders -- 27/10/2012 7:50:32 AM >
Post #: 69
RE: Where this hype is coming from is a mystery to me. - 27/10/2012 8:11:15 AM   
3wonders

 

Posts: 8
Joined: 19/1/2009
I agree - the 'issues with M' erm, plot, has been done in The World is Not Enough as has been 'agent gone bad' in Goldeneye - it's not unique at all. The franchise needs to move forward, not back, as it did majestically with Casino Royale. I was underwhelmed, although had a few nice touches.
Post #: 70
RE: Where this hype is coming from is a mystery to me. - 27/10/2012 8:59:43 AM   
Hobbitonlass

 

Posts: 11919
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Westeros
Bloody loved it (despite the glaring error with the Tube - after Q and Bond banging on about London in the rush hour and the amount of people, the train that crashed was completely empty. Also, it looked suspiciously like a Piccadilly Line train rather than a District Line train which was the line they were supposed to be on, Piccadilly Line doesn't run through Embankment where they came out). That aside I thought it was a great film, right amount of action, humour, tension. Garden was ace as the villain, very creepy!

It got a large round of applause at the end. Oh and I thought the gun barrel scene worked fine at the end. Loved the opening credits as well.

_____________________________

Come join in the Photo competition http://www.empireonline.com/forum/tm.asp?m=3116407&mpage=1&key=

(in reply to 3wonders)
Post #: 71
RE: Where this hype is coming from is a mystery to me. - 27/10/2012 9:58:00 AM   
matty_b


Posts: 14520
Joined: 19/10/2005
From: Outpost 31 calling McMurtle.
quote:

the train that crashed was completely empty. Also, it looked suspiciously like a Piccadilly Line train rather than a District Line train which was the line they were supposed to be on,


1) It did, but you can rationalise it by the fact that everyone would probably have been thrown to the ground in all fairness

2) Geek. 

_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze
Mattyb is a shining example of what the perfect Empire Forum member is.


(in reply to Hobbitonlass)
Post #: 72
RE: Where this hype is coming from is a mystery to me. - 27/10/2012 10:02:34 AM   
elzupasmonkey


Posts: 277
Joined: 30/9/2005
Pedestrian stuff.

It's only after seeing someone like Sam Mendes do action that you realise how good a job Martin Campbell did with Casino Royale.

Didn't like the self pitying, whiny, Bond at the start.

Naomie Harris is a disappointing addition. I don't know what Mendes saw in her audition to make her think she should be in this movie. And her reveal is as groan inducing as another blockbuster from this year.

The underground sequence is a wasted opportunity. Die Hard with a Vengeance did it better and smarter.

Over and over again again we get told how old Bond is getting. No one ever shuts up about it!

Bardem's villiain is the kind of caricatured flaming homosexual that was around in Roger Moore's era.

Cyber terrorism yet again. The magic box that can set off an explosion in MI6 with gas cannisters (!) and also, presumably, a flame to ignite it.

Craig's emotional outburst at the end should never have happened. Bond wouldn't have done that.

When your ending evokes memories of Crocodile Dundee 2 and Home Alone, you're in trouble.

Roger Deakins photography was BREATHTAKING!!! There are shots in this that are the most beautiful in any Bond movie ever.

One too many shots of people standing with their legs slightly apart, staring off into the distance when we first see them in the scene.

The thing that struck me as the strangest is something I'm not sure I've seen before in a Bond movie (that I can remember anyway). In one scene, Bond is in the position where he can save a strangers life. Now, for all he knows, this stranger could be an entirely innocent individual, and yet, he does nothing. I was surprised and disappointed by that. I kept waiting for him to do something but he never did. I was disappointed by that. I know he has a licence to kill, but surely he would have saved him?

_____________________________

http://tiny.cc/odytmw

(in reply to Hobbitonlass)
Post #: 73
RE: Skyfall - 27/10/2012 10:28:23 AM   
Scruffybobby

 

Posts: 4312
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: My House
quote:

ORIGINAL: musht


As for the "revelation" of Eve's surname (as soon as she mentioned she was assistant to Mallory I knew the rumours had been true), talk about clunky. Really, they've never been introduced, it would have been so much better if their banter had been interrupted by M on the intercom (would have been a nice nod to the old Moneypenny days); "Ms Moneypenny, send Mr Bond in please" or something along those lines. It would have been far better than the introduction line.



That was one of the few things I didn't think worked and I agree that the "intercom" thing would have been much better. I also did think the CGI Komodo dragons were a little off but not enough to spoil anything. Enough of that though.

I really, really enjoyed it. Craig is now really comfortable in the role and plays it with real confidence.  Bardem's potryal of  a funny, scary and pervy villain is superb , and the support cast are also strong.  With Wishaw, Fiennes and Harris being welcome new addtions to the series

Making the focus of the plot personal revenge isn't entirely new in the series but works extremely well here and raises the stakes emotionally - something which is very rare indeed in Bond.  The entire film looks amazing - especially in the IMAX presentation - and is the best looking film of the year.  The title sequence is very effective and Adele's song matches the moody visuals brilliantly.

Will be off to see this again very soon and looking forward to 2014 and beyond with great anticipation.

9/10 (rounding stars down to 4 cause I can't give half scores)

< Message edited by Scruffybobby -- 27/10/2012 10:31:06 AM >


_____________________________

I want to taste you like yogurt.

(in reply to musht)
Post #: 74
RE: Skyfall - 27/10/2012 10:32:21 AM   
garjobo

 

Posts: 7
Joined: 27/10/2012
At last a forum I can perhaps get decent comment from!! Having just witness the mess of the movie which is Skyfall ( Im a massive Bond fan btw ) I have been so very disapointed by it i went on a few Bond forums only for threads to be deleted etc..clearly your not allowed to dis the latest enstalment!

So..more fool me huh..but i read so many reviews - 5stars etc - all positive stuff - and yes..spoilt it for myself reading test screenings and spoilers...again..more fool me..but im a fan..cant be helped. Anyway, so, last night went to see this movie..and yes..expected it to be another Goldfinger or Spy..heck even Casino..but instead...all I got was a movie that was plain dull and boring..woefully boring.

Nothing happened..except talk..talk talk...this isnt a Bond movie this was a Sam Mendas movie. Now yes the performances/cast were excellent and some of the shots were nicely framed, the opening titles great and a few nice references to Bond past..but boy o boy...that first act and into the second act..nothing happened...from one long talking scene into another...a couple - literally - a couple of very very quick fistie-cuffs and then..plods to another introduction of a character and a talking scene.

What perplexs me is all these 5 star reviews - as I say I love Bond loved reading glowing reviews...but they dont match up with the film at all..and furthermore...so many reviews said the 3rd act dragged a little. IT DOESNT. The 3rd act kicks off..the 3rd act is excellent..its not really a Bond film at that point..and literally..without giving spoilers away is so totally stuipt its beyond belief...totally jarring with rest of movie...i mean Bond protects M by what..taking her someone where theres no ammo/help....and leads a trail so they can be found!!!!!!! and then...Bond is 'rewarded' so to speak for his actions at end of movie!!!!!! I dont go to bond films for permances and poems read out during shootouts ( nice touch mind you ) but some kind of plot which isnt insulting to an audience..this movie was 4 yrs in the making!! and had 3 writers at least!!

I wont go on, interested in others thoughts...again..my main gripe so to speak is..all this positive reviews...the audience i was with seemed less than impressed, one snoring - i kid you not! - a few walking out ( ok it was a late night screening etc but even so ) and before Bond finished his gunbarrel people were outta their seats..what does that tell you.

Nope - sadly..this makes Diamonds a classic!..again, excellent performaces, Craig looking like Steve McQueen..very good...nice touches..but really needed at least 3 big..big action sequeneces early on to justify this as a Bond movie. It's bordering on a art-house movie..which may be why 'reviewers' has lapped it up. Perhaps i ruined it for myself seeing all the spoilers...i will probably watch it again and perhaps enjoy it a little more...just..disappointed that's all.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 75
RE: Where this hype is coming from is a mystery to me. - 27/10/2012 11:03:14 AM   
Hobbitonlass

 

Posts: 11919
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Westeros

quote:

ORIGINAL: matty_b

quote:

the train that crashed was completely empty. Also, it looked suspiciously like a Piccadilly Line train rather than a District Line train which was the line they were supposed to be on,


1) It did, but you can rationalise it by the fact that everyone would probably have been thrown to the ground in all fairness

2) Geek. 



If you've ever been on a Piccadilly line train in rush hour, even people thrown to the ground wouldn't hide them . But I'll leave it there as it wasn't a major problem

_____________________________

Come join in the Photo competition http://www.empireonline.com/forum/tm.asp?m=3116407&mpage=1&key=

(in reply to matty_b)
Post #: 76
RE: James Bond R.I.P - 27/10/2012 1:59:54 PM   
manwihtheplan

 

Posts: 99
Joined: 11/9/2012
quote:

I just watched skyfall last night - o dear...why have they got rid of the most iconic opening sequence (the gun barrel logo) then tacked it on at the end??? Am i the only one who thinks this is not really a bond film no exploding pen...'we dont do that anymore' a quote from the new Q - I thought this was supposed to be celebrating the hostory not negating it...it took the film about an hour and a half to introduce a slight of bond when we see the DB5 - yes you are watching a Bond film - obviously I dont agree with all the 5 star reviews - its flat and too reliant on acting...would a signature stunt gone a miss? a memorable car chase?


The lack of the gun barrel at the start has been discussed on Jame Bond sites and regular film sites and I would say the overwhelming majority of fans are against what Eon have done. You are not alone in feeling shortchanged or saddened by the 'change'. Many fans were upset about it being at the end of Quantum of Solace. The producers didn't care back in 2008 and they don't care in 2012.

I've also read some posts complaining about the inclusion of the f word (which makes the franchise less family-orientated). Some people have also continued the debate about Craig's Bond films not being proper Bond films: the lack of gadgets, lack of the Bond theme played in the action scenes, dour gritty 'realism' instead of a slightly lighter approach. I did see a recent Craig interview where he emphasized that Bond's world is a bit 'camp' so it's possible Bond 24 will have a lighter touch, but it's extremely unlikely the overall style of Crag's Bond films will change. Craig's Bond films do appeal to the Jason Bourne/Jack Bauer action fans and so I can't see much change happening in Craig's Bond 24 and 25. Let's just hope someone at MGM can convince Eon to return the gun barrel to right place! If they want to change the rest, okay, the franchise does have to adapt to suit the times, but keep the gun barrel at the start of every Bond film. To muck about with that is, quite frankly, unforgivable.

< Message edited by manwihtheplan -- 27/10/2012 2:01:08 PM >
Post #: 77
RE: James Bond R.I.P - 27/10/2012 2:31:51 PM   
Deviation


Posts: 27284
Joined: 2/6/2006
From: Enemies of Film HQ
quote:

ORIGINAL: manwihtheplan

The lack of the gun barrel at the start has been discussed on Jame Bond sites and regular film sites and I would say the overwhelming majority of fans are against what Eon have done. You are not alone in feeling shortchanged or saddened by the 'change'. Many fans were upset about it being at the end of Quantum of Solace. The producers didn't care back in 2008 and they don't care in 2012.





quote:


I've also read some posts complaining about the inclusion of the f word (which makes the franchise less family-orientated). Some people have also continued the debate about Craig's Bond films not being proper Bond films: the lack of gadgets, lack of the Bond theme played in the action scenes, dour gritty 'realism' instead of a slightly lighter approach. I did see a recent Craig interview where he emphasized that Bond's world is a bit 'camp' so it's possible Bond 24 will have a lighter touch, but it's extremely unlikely the overall style of Crag's Bond films will change. Craig's Bond films do appeal to the Jason Bourne/Jack Bauer action fans and so I can't see much change happening in Craig's Bond 24 and 25. Let's just hope someone at MGM can convince Eon to return the gun barrel to right place! If they want to change the rest, okay, the franchise does have to adapt to suit the times, but keep the gun barrel at the start of every Bond film. To muck about with that is, quite frankly, unforgivable.




< Message edited by Deviation -- 27/10/2012 2:32:49 PM >


_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dpp1978
There are certainly times where calling a person a cunt is not only reasonable, it is a gross understatement.

quote:


ORIGINAL: elab49
I really wish I could go down to see Privates

(in reply to manwihtheplan)
Post #: 78
RE: James Bond R.I.P - 27/10/2012 2:58:08 PM   
Private Hudson


Posts: 1832
Joined: 30/9/2005
I did enjoy it, but it was not as good as Casino Royale and better than QoS (which isn't saying much).

They had set up a great premise... MI6 under attack, but I think they really didn't do it justice. I would have liked to have seen something a bit more in the Bond style, like the way the bad guys attack the Houses of Parliament at the start of the From Russia With Love video game!

Seriously, I was glad to see Q back and the other things that happened which I won't spoil for anyone. I also liked Bond's Scottish roots being finally acknowledged on screen (though how any Scot would ever reply "England" to country is beyond belief and that is more ridiculous than the empty tube train)

I though Bardem was actually wasted in a role that was devoid of menace. In fact one could argue he won (if again you have seen the movie).

He had no mastermind plot, which was a shame.

The gunbarrel at the end does actually make sense now as after this movie James Bond the character is finally 007. So the next movie should have the gunbarrel at the start or else I think we can safely say that James Bond did die after DAD.

And the lack of the James Bond theme is incredibly stupid. Along with Star Wars it is the most iconic movie theme ever and yet they are not taking full advantage of it? When I was a kid, watching a Bond movie with the theme in full play was exciting.

And please can we have more gadgets in future? Gadgets are an important part of cinematic Bond and indeed Fleming's Bond. The Briitsh secret service (and OAS, SOE and Naval Intelligence) have a long history of creating gadgets for spies which are real. So Fleming wasn't being silly but rather adding a bit of entertainment to a deadly game.

Also no real Bond girl in the last 2 movies? Come on!

I am loathe to say this, but even though I did enjoy it, it wasn't the 007 spectacular we were promised. I have no issue with the movie makers wanting to add a bit of character development now and again, but that is 3 movies in a row we haven't had a 'classic formulaic Bond' which we all love. Casino Royale was far superior because it did have excellent action scenes and it had the novel factor due to the first book being Casino Royale.

The problem I feel lies with Daniel Craig himself. I think the films may have been more like Bond if he wasn't in them. He doesn't look like James Bond. He is too short, too blond and he is just not suave or debonair. He looks like a hud carrier.

When he wears the tuxedo I think it looks like it doesn't quite fit him.

James Bond belongs to us, the public. And while there will be people who love these newer movies the point is that for 50 years Bond has become so successful due to its formula of wit, style and fantasy. When that is not upheld over time then the fans of the Craig movies will disappear when he goes and what will be left?

There are so may interesting ideas and villains Bond can take from the real world right now that we need: African dictators threatening genocide, rogue terrorist groups trying to get their hands on a nuke, or something a bit more world threatening.

So actually I think the next movie has to be a formulaic Bond with Quantum as the villains, which is fair enough.

So with Skyfall I would say give it 3 stars, it is not the worst Bond movie, but it is nowhere near the likes of You Only Live Twice, Goldfinger, The Spy Who Loved Me, Licence to Kill (which had Bond a bit more realistic yet still gave us a few 007 moments - the oil tanker chase for example) or even my favourite post 1989 Bond The World is Not Enough.

But I really do think James Bond's future now hangs in the balance. The experimentation was over, I thought, after QoS, but it surely has to be after Skyfall.



_____________________________

Watch my spoof movie of FULL METAL JACKET here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCGRWVvM-Zo&feature=plcp&context=C31ca298UDOEgsToPDskJ4_UorjolrWTaxEGMj5GO0

(in reply to Deviation)
Post #: 79
RE: Midnight Premiere - 27/10/2012 3:08:35 PM   
Private Hudson


Posts: 1832
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: KingOfPop

Saw the film yesterday...major major disappointment in my opinion. I realize now that the hope of watching a great traditional Bond flick are gone. There are those who love the change of Bond with Craig...the grittier more realistic approach...and there are those like me that love Bond the way it used to be. I just think this film is dull and takes Bond in the wrong direction. It has good moments but will not be remembered. Sad sad sad.


Yeah I think you have hit the nail on the head.

The NewBond as we should now call it has not one iconic or memorable scene that will be remembered in 50 years time in the way we have the Aston Martin DB5 ejector seat, the ski jump in TSWLM or the alligator dash in Live and Let Die for example.

It is an action thriller, but not James Bond. Bond lives in his own world and not the real world.

007 is all about fantasy, not realism.


_____________________________

Watch my spoof movie of FULL METAL JACKET here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCGRWVvM-Zo&feature=plcp&context=C31ca298UDOEgsToPDskJ4_UorjolrWTaxEGMj5GO0
Post #: 80
RE: not quite as amazing as you're hoping - 27/10/2012 3:20:10 PM   
Private Hudson


Posts: 1832
Joined: 30/9/2005
Also, when will people realise that we really don't want to read their reviews on here?!#

We have the Empire review and that is what we are debating, and indeed the film itself.

If I want third rate, amateur reviews I will buy Total Film.

_____________________________

Watch my spoof movie of FULL METAL JACKET here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCGRWVvM-Zo&feature=plcp&context=C31ca298UDOEgsToPDskJ4_UorjolrWTaxEGMj5GO0

(in reply to Coyleone)
Post #: 81
RE: not quite as amazing as you're hoping - 27/10/2012 3:42:47 PM   
mightybeansprout


Posts: 89
Joined: 31/7/2008
From: Co. Meath
Saw Skyfall last night, Have to say I enjoyed it, I'm a lifelong Bond Fan and love the darker more serious films of Dalton and Craig. It's nice to put the mess that was QoS out of the way as the most recent bond film, tho I couldn't put this above Casino Royale. Martin Campbell has directed two of the the best bond movies and this won't challenge them I'm afraid. I really enjoyed the nods to the past movies and the rebirth of the Q Branch but all in all this is not really a Bond film in my opinion, definitely not the last hour anyway. This isn't necessarily a bad thing and its nice to be as suprised as I was with the movie, but I can't help feel it was all a little too understated and Mendesish for my taste. Bardem was good and managed to provide a feeling of menace and threat that was laughably missing from Mathieu Amalrics character in the last outing, there's maybe just a little too much of a flat period in the middle of the film for me to go mad about it. I'll see it again over the wkend and maybe see it differently, its hard to judge on the first viewing but for me, for now it's 3 and a half star.

_____________________________

Xbox Live Gamertag: Smartian rt


You see Doughal, these cows are small, those cows are far away. Small, far away.........

(in reply to Private Hudson)
Post #: 82
RE: Skyfall - 27/10/2012 3:47:26 PM   
Private Hudson


Posts: 1832
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: porntrooper


quote:

ORIGINAL: manwihtheplan

quote:

Why is it such a big issue?


Because it was meant to be at the start. What gives B Broccoli the right to put it at the end? Oh, because she inherited the franchise from her father! So that gives her the right to mess around with it. But as I say, it's meant to be at the start. The whole point of the gun barrel sequence is to tell the film going public you're about to watch a James Bond film, you're entering the Bond universe. It sets the tone. Without it you lose the tone. It starts like any other film. Why kill off the unique start to the James Bond films? It's moronic and disrespectful.

Most people won't care because to them Bond films are just another action film that pops up every two to three years. Most people can't even remember all the James Bond film titles! But long term fans do care because it's dismantling the James Bond tradition. If you love James Bond films because they include the distinctive classic opening gun barrel scene, why would you ever think shoving it to the end of the film is a good idea? You wouldn't. It shows Barbara Broccoli's arrogance or disrespect for Bond tradition. But she knows the franchise is a license to print money so she knows she can get away with changing the gun barrel.


I honestly don't know how to respond to this.

"It sets the tone. Without it you loose the tone"

The point of the gun barrel sequence is to set the tone of the film? How? The sequence has no tone, it's the same (minus a few variations here and there) for all films so has no impact on the tone of the rest of each Bond film. The gun barrel at the start of Die Another Day told me nothing about the film I was about to watch, it set no tone whatsoever. I'd say the only gun barrel sequence that really did directly link into the tone of the overall film was the one from Casino Royale, as it was built into the pre-credits sequence.

It's such a random thing to be annoyed by. Would I prefer it at the start? No idea. It makes no difference to me whatsoever. I cant see how it makes a difference to anyone. I cant see how any one could feel it is somehow 'disrespectful', or 'moronic', or 'arrogant'. Tonally it makes no impact, and it has no impact on the quality of the film. Such a strange thing to be aggrieved by.


C'mon give the guy a break. The gunbarrel at the beginning is tradition. It is a unique trademark that Bond has had right since 1962.

Someone made a good point that Star Wars movies always begin with the crawl, so official Eon productions begin with the gunbarrel.

Does this now mean we include as Bond films Never Say Never Again and the 1967 Casino Royale?

It may seem insignificant, but when you start tinkering too much with a winning formula you may end up so far removed from the original, successful formula you end up with nothing.

It is like the whole New Coke v Classic Coke scenario (which I played into the new Kutzov computer)....

By showing us the new stuff we start to realise just how much we love the classic stuff!

I expect a backlash from pre-Daniel Craig Bond fans like never before.

_____________________________

Watch my spoof movie of FULL METAL JACKET here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCGRWVvM-Zo&feature=plcp&context=C31ca298UDOEgsToPDskJ4_UorjolrWTaxEGMj5GO0

(in reply to porntrooper)
Post #: 83
RE: not quite as amazing as you're hoping - 27/10/2012 3:47:27 PM   
Scruffybobby

 

Posts: 4312
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: My House

quote:

ORIGINAL: Private Hudson

Also, when will people realise that we really don't want to read their reviews on here?!#

We have the Empire review and that is what we are debating, and indeed the film itself.

If I want third rate, amateur reviews I will buy Total Film.


You just posted a review.


Like the one you just posted above?



_____________________________

I want to taste you like yogurt.

(in reply to Private Hudson)
Post #: 84
RE: not quite as amazing as you're hoping - 27/10/2012 3:51:08 PM   
Private Hudson


Posts: 1832
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: mightybeansprout

Saw Skyfall last night, Have to say I enjoyed it, I'm a lifelong Bond Fan and love the darker more serious films of Dalton and Craig. It's nice to put the mess that was QoS out of the way as the most recent bond film, tho I couldn't put this above Casino Royale. Martin Campbell has directed two of the the best bond movies and this won't challenge them I'm afraid. I really enjoyed the nods to the past movies and the rebirth of the Q Branch but all in all this is not really a Bond film in my opinion, definitely not the last hour anyway. This isn't necessarily a bad thing and its nice to be as suprised as I was with the movie, but I can't help feel it was all a little too understated and Mendesish for my taste. Bardem was good and managed to provide a feeling of menace and threat that was laughably missing from Mathieu Amalrics character in the last outing, there's maybe just a little too much of a flat period in the middle of the film for me to go mad about it. I'll see it again over the wkend and maybe see it differently, its hard to judge on the first viewing but for me, for now it's 3 and a half star.


I didn't think he was scary at all. In fact anyone who brings up Max Zorin deserves to be provided 'with a drink'!

Also is it just me or is Daniel Craig lacking in charisma? He may be a good actor but is he really a movie star? I don't think he has the charm to make Bond what he was made by the likes of Connery and Moore.

Ralph Fiennes has more charisma and displayed this in the movie. I thought in the few scenes he was in he was superb, as always right enough.

Yeah bring back Martin Campbell, he has made 2 superb 007 adventures.


_____________________________

Watch my spoof movie of FULL METAL JACKET here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCGRWVvM-Zo&feature=plcp&context=C31ca298UDOEgsToPDskJ4_UorjolrWTaxEGMj5GO0

(in reply to mightybeansprout)
Post #: 85
RE: Not only not the best Bond movie, but not a Bond mo... - 27/10/2012 3:58:11 PM   
Private Hudson


Posts: 1832
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: samuel59

is it just me, or is Skyfall really boring? After a promising opening pre title sequence, it turns into a surreal story about an elderly lady who is being pursued by a villian with the campest credentials, who only has an emaciated grumpy clothes horse of a bodyguard to protect her, who looks even older than she does. Up until now I've had a lot of time for Daniel Craig, but when the end product is an anti climax of Promethian proportions, it had me hankering for the glory days of 007. To be fair it's not 'Die Another Day' bad or as regretable as 'View To A Kill', but I would rather watch any of the other 20 than revisit this sorry tale, and yes, that even includes The Man With The Golden Gun!


The Man With The Golden Gun is one of the very best Bonds! And it may not be a faithful adaptation of the book, but it is very Flemingesque and Scaramanga is a worthy adversary for 007!

DAD was perhaps the jumping the shark moment, but even A View to a Kill had some good bits, though it was Roger Moore's poorest effort.

I do think we now are coming to the stage where we have classic Bond 1962-1989 and then new Bond 1995- present day.

Brosnan's movies were entertaining and he provided a middle ground between Connery and Moore, though I do believe that Connery wasn't always so tough and brutal and that the wit was present very early on in Bond, and that is part of his longevity...

Take Thunderball. The bit at the end as the guy says aboard the crashing Disco Volante "I can't swim!" Connery pushes him into the wayer with a rubber ring and says "Never too late to learn!"

Perhaps the writers of the last few films should make way for some new blood and have someone with a bit of wit involved too.

Here's the thing also. Will all the 12 year old boys who dream of being 007 continue that dream under the Daniel Craig era? Who knows. Bond has so much competition these days he has to keep his USP which is he is fantasy, wit and style all rolled up in a Union Jack.

Please come back Commander Bond. Your country needs you.


_____________________________

Watch my spoof movie of FULL METAL JACKET here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCGRWVvM-Zo&feature=plcp&context=C31ca298UDOEgsToPDskJ4_UorjolrWTaxEGMj5GO0
Post #: 86
RE: not quite as amazing as you're hoping - 27/10/2012 4:00:38 PM   
Private Hudson


Posts: 1832
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Scruffybobby


quote:

ORIGINAL: Private Hudson

Also, when will people realise that we really don't want to read their reviews on here?!#

We have the Empire review and that is what we are debating, and indeed the film itself.

If I want third rate, amateur reviews I will buy Total Film.


You just posted a review.


Like the one you just posted above?




It is my comments on the movie. Yes it is my likes and dislikes of the film, but not a proper review.

But then you know this!


_____________________________

Watch my spoof movie of FULL METAL JACKET here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCGRWVvM-Zo&feature=plcp&context=C31ca298UDOEgsToPDskJ4_UorjolrWTaxEGMj5GO0

(in reply to Scruffybobby)
Post #: 87
RE: not quite as amazing as you're hoping - 27/10/2012 4:01:55 PM   
Private Hudson


Posts: 1832
Joined: 30/9/2005
This is a forum to talk about the movie.

Naturally to do so you have to discuss what you liked and disliked.

However do we need a formal review from amateurs? No.

Offer your opinions and let's discuss.

_____________________________

Watch my spoof movie of FULL METAL JACKET here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCGRWVvM-Zo&feature=plcp&context=C31ca298UDOEgsToPDskJ4_UorjolrWTaxEGMj5GO0

(in reply to Private Hudson)
Post #: 88
RE: not quite as amazing as you're hoping - 27/10/2012 4:04:43 PM   
MonsterCat


Posts: 7934
Joined: 24/3/2011
From: St. Albans, Hertfordshire
quote:

ORIGINAL: Private Hudson

Also, when will people realise that we really don't want to read their reviews on here?!#

We have the Empire review and that is what we are debating, and indeed the film itself.

If I want third rate, amateur reviews I will buy Total Film.


You might not want to read other people's reviews, but others do.

The whole purpose of kicking open a thread like this is for people to post their thoughts, feelings and reviews. Quite frankly you can piss off if you don't like it in here.

< Message edited by MonsterCat -- 27/10/2012 4:05:56 PM >


_____________________________

"I am a writer, a doctor, a nuclear physicist and a theoretical philosopher. But above all, I am a man, a hopelessly inquisitive man, just like you."

Films watched in 2013

(in reply to Private Hudson)
Post #: 89
RE: not quite as amazing as you're hoping - 27/10/2012 4:10:13 PM   
Private Hudson


Posts: 1832
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

quote:

ORIGINAL: Private Hudson

Also, when will people realise that we really don't want to read their reviews on here?!#

We have the Empire review and that is what we are debating, and indeed the film itself.

If I want third rate, amateur reviews I will buy Total Film.


You might not want to read other people's reviews, but others do.

The whole purpose of kicking open a thread like this is for people to post their thoughts, feelings and reviews. Quite frankly you can piss off if you don't like it in here.


Yes post their thoughts and feelings that is fine. I just laugh at people who write their 'review' in the style of the pros and try to make it look formal.

Also, sunny Jim, I've been on Empire a long, long time. So don't be cheeky, that is a sure sign you have lost the argument.

Enjoy.

_____________________________

Watch my spoof movie of FULL METAL JACKET here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCGRWVvM-Zo&feature=plcp&context=C31ca298UDOEgsToPDskJ4_UorjolrWTaxEGMj5GO0

(in reply to MonsterCat)
Post #: 90
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: Bond back on top (no shagging pun intended) Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


 
Movie News  |  Empire Blog  |  Movie Reviews  |  Future Films  |  Features  |  Video Interviews  |  Image Gallery  |  Competitions  |  Forum  |  Magazine  |  Resources
 
Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.078