The Alchemist on 31/7/2012 at 20:11
While I agree that these trailers show too much of the movie, I thought that looked great. Lots of action, lots of fun, and fucking Javier Bardem as the badguy? Score. Too bad I already saw the movie. I look forward to the extended play at the theatres.
henke on 1/8/2012 at 06:45
Quote Posted by jay pettitt
But this one makes it look like just another bad Bond flick.
I wouldn't say it looks like an archetypal Bond film. It seems to focus more on Bond and less on the mission and the villain than most of them. Though I guess that's been true for all the ones with Daniel Craig.
Scots Taffer on 2/8/2012 at 03:18
I reckon that looks ok.
Muzman on 2/8/2012 at 03:27
The endless fading out made me want to hunt down and strangle who ever edited it. But the movie underneath that I glimpsed momentarily looks pretty fancy. No real info what it's about of course, but hey.
("It's about James Bond! Duhhhh!" may well be a suitable answer)
Slasher on 2/8/2012 at 10:41
Looks interesting. I hope it sheds more light on the conspiracy that's been hinted at in the past two movies. They've got a story arc but we're two movies in and still don't really know what it's about.
nicked on 26/10/2012 at 20:26
So I went to see this today, having avoided all but the initial trailer and not really knowing anything about it... and really enjoyed it. That said, I can see it being quite divisive; in many ways it's a larger departure from the Bond formula than even the other Daniel Craig films. There were some annoyances, but on the whole, a fantastic, tightly-focused, down-to-Earth, character-driven Bond.
Some highlights, with spoiler tags because of MASSIVE SPOILERS!!!:
* Sassy gay Bond villain = amazing. That and the concept that he is basically a mentally-snapped version of Bond himself.
* The final act is basically Straw Dogs - stripped down, brutal violence with a solid emotional framework driving it.
* A few too many 4th wall wink-to-the-audience moments for my taste (the Aston Martin, "You've got to be joking" upon meeting Q, the whole Moneypenny reveal) but not enough to spoil it.
* Some great and at times very unorthodox music from Thomas Newman.
* Just manages to skirt "Hollywood computer hacking" territory without quite becoming laughably ridiculous.
* Does what Die Another Day tried to do with bearded thought-he-was-dead Bond, but far less stupid.
* Explores what it means to be in espionage in this day and age quite intelligently - risky, but so much more interesting than the usual explosions and bluster.
* Keeps the action almost entirely in low-key UK locations, really highlights the fact that the plot is so much more than just follow-the-clues stringing exotic locations together.
* Lord Voldemort is running MI6, and Narcissa Malfoy is a high-ranking member of Parliament. Uh-oh. But seriously, Ralph Fiennes is a stand-out here.
Some of the sheen will probably wear off when I think about it some more, but for now it gets a big thumbs up from me. :thumb:
SubJeff on 26/10/2012 at 22:22
Saw it today too.
What the hell is going on?
A massive departure from the usual formula and very, very interesting for it. The more I think about it the more I like it, but there it was; almost not Bond at all.
The intimate nature of the plot was quite refreshing and, as nicked says, the location choices were really low-key but just so much more real for it. I didn't think I'd like the main protagonist from the trailer but he was pretty faaaaboulous. Ha ha. Really though, the only thing I didn't like was his injury, but more on that later.
The action was much less Bourne than the last two films (especially the Something of Boris) and made a nice change. Loving the bags under Craig's eyes too.
Now, onto the "meshing" with old Bond and the legacy aspects this treats.
Good:
M's new office being the old office from the Connery and more specifically Moore era.
The Aston. Yes.
The new Q. Good choice.
Bond's history. Like it.
Bad:
The bad guy having to have another medical problem/deformity/freaky thing about him. Come on man, this is just silly now.
Moneypenny. GTFO. Bad actress, not sassy enough, flirtiness is too obvious, and I don't fancy her. Also a touch of positive discrimination going on? Where is Samantha Bond? Or someone good.
Gadgets. This is not optional you asshats. NOT OPTIONAL.
Oh, and the Adele song was good. Suitably grand, subtle enough.
Thumbs up but I can't decide on a score out of 5 yet.
nicked on 27/10/2012 at 05:55
Yeah there's a fine line between affectionate nostalgia and taking the piss out of your own legacy, and "Haha, what did you expect, an exploding pen, lol" drifted into the latter.
I did like Eve as a character, but the Moneypenny set-up was just groan-inducing.
I'll be very interested to see where they take the series from here. In some ways, it's almost set it up to come full circle. We've got back to a point where you could do a shot-for-shot remake of one of the Connery films with Daniel Craig and it wouldn't feel that weird. Back to male M, all the main characters of the series have been introduced, Moneypenny, Q etc., he's got his signature drink and gun now. So either we'll see some intriguing personal stories now that all the chess pieces are in place (death of his wife might be interesting to revisit) or more likely, MGM will figure that they can stop trying now and get back to explosions and quips.
Al_B on 3/11/2012 at 02:39
Saw this today and was very impressed overall. After a hugely disappointing Quantum of Solace it's good to see the series back on track. It's not as ambitious with it's use of locations as previous Bond films (probably due to budget reasons) but the slower pace is really refreshing after its immediate predecessor. Further comments require use of spoiler tags:
The whole theme of resurrection was really well played. This is a character that's been played over and over again to the extent where Bond as a character is a tired resemblance of what he used to stand for. Films have moved on, technology has moved on and sending someone in as a suited commando doesn't hold sway in the same way that it might have done 50 years ago.
The pain shown during the film of an agent really out of his depth physically and, given the situation, mentally was well treated and although ultimately Bond is always going to win the eventual cost was far higher than I expected.
I'm probably reading too much into this but during the initial meeting with Q they both stared at a painting where a "grand old warship" being hauled away for scrap. When the film ends M's office, as in "classic" Bond films, features two triumphant warships in a painting with a very similar style. I'm probably reading far too much into this, but I like to think it's not coincidental
nicked on 3/11/2012 at 07:11
I didn't notice that, but I have no doubt it would have been deliberate. It's a constructed set, so everything in it will be deliberately placed, it's not much of a stretch to think they'd match the paintings to a plot point.
