His Master's Voice wrote: I don't think the name Blofeld is ever mentioned anywhere in the trailer (or the casting calls for the matter).
Indeed.
Also bear in mind that this is supposed to lead on from the loose ends of Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace, the prevailing theory being that Quantum are being run (directly or indirectly) by SPECTRE. So Bond has already gone through Mr Green and Mr White and both of their organisations, before being distracted by the events of Skyfall that hit a little closer to home. I fully expect this to pick up with Bond where Skyfall left him (more on his past), but the main plot as it were to lead on from QoS. Although the two may be connected.
If its about SPECTRE Blofeld has to be at the top yes?
Though we might be talking about a sub boss. I wonder if this is during a one off stage to recruit Bond to SPECTRE before he becomes the primary protagonist against them.
I'm going into my cupboard right now to put one on!
Back OT is it just me or is the missing person in that photograph being set up as Blofled. I'm still going to watch it 14 times at the cinema, but this plot device seems to be getting signposted from miles away.
Back OT is it just me or is the missing person in that photograph being set up as Blofled. I'm still going to watch it 14 times at the cinema, but this plot device seems to be getting signposted from miles away.
I don't think they'd be that obvious, especially when you look at the trailers for Skyfall (almost anything in those happened in the first third of the film, the real meat of the story with Silva/M/Skyfall itself was barely touched on).
My first thoughts was that it was Bond's brother (him being the child on the left of the picture). I think there will be two strands to this plot, one being about Bond and the missing person from the picture and the fallout from Skyfall, the other focusing on the emergence of Spectre. The two may of course connect at some level or another, but I think it's too early to assume too much.
Back OT is it just me or is the missing person in that photograph being set up as Blofled. I'm still going to watch it 14 times at the cinema, but this plot device seems to be getting signposted from miles away.
I don't think they'd be that obvious, especially when you look at the trailers for Skyfall (almost anything in those happened in the first third of the film, the real meat of the story with Silva/M/Skyfall itself was barely touched on).
My first thoughts was that it was Bond's brother (him being the child on the left of the picture). I think there will be two strands to this plot, one being about Bond and the missing person from the picture and the fallout from Skyfall, the other focusing on the emergence of Spectre. The two may of course connect at some level or another, but I think it's too early to assume too much.
Got this dread feeling that Bond and Blofeld are going to be brothers Austin Powers style
Back OT is it just me or is the missing person in that photograph being set up as Blofled. I'm still going to watch it 14 times at the cinema, but this plot device seems to be getting signposted from miles away.
I don't think they'd be that obvious, especially when you look at the trailers for Skyfall (almost anything in those happened in the first third of the film, the real meat of the story with Silva/M/Skyfall itself was barely touched on).
My first thoughts was that it was Bond's brother (him being the child on the left of the picture). I think there will be two strands to this plot, one being about Bond and the missing person from the picture and the fallout from Skyfall, the other focusing on the emergence of Spectre. The two may of course connect at some level or another, but I think it's too early to assume too much.
Got this dread feeling that Bond and Blofeld are going to be brothers Austin Powers style
Yeah, even if he's not Blofeld, I've got a suspicion that Christoph Waltz' character will be related to Bond somehow.
Actually I thought it would turn out that Andrew Scott was his half-brother. It may be that the Christoph Waltz character knew his mother, though no direct relation.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: Got this dread feeling that Bond and Blofeld are going to be brothers Austin Powers style
That's about as good of a reason to think this won't be the case as you can get.
Bond's past is well known to him and everyone around him that matter. There's really no place for an ugly brother plot device anywhere near a Bond film and I'm going to assume people that wrote Skyfall know as much.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: Got this dread feeling that Bond and Blofeld are going to be brothers Austin Powers style
That's about as good of a reason to think this won't be the case as you can get.
Bond's past is well known to him and everyone around him that matter. There's really no place for an ugly brother plot device anywhere near a Bond film and I'm going to assume people that wrote Skyfall know as much.
You would hope so, but we know that Bond's parents died in a skiing accident...or did they?
Hopefully, we'll get the best Bond ever, and not something daft like his brother/father/second cousin twice removed etc etc turning up.
SPECTRE is a criminal organisation in the James Bond-verse.
It stands for Special Executive for Counter-intelligence, Terrorism, Revenge and Extortion led by Ernst Stavro Blofeld. Dr. No was also a member of SPECTRE
Re the trailer: I can't say I'm bothered by the recent James Bond films. The only one that I thought was any good was Casino Royale. QoS was crap and Skyfall was...OKish. The villains just don't seem to have any appeal
SPECTRE is a criminal organisation in the James Bond-verse.
It stands for Special Executive for Counter-intelligence, Terrorism, Revenge and Extortion led by Ernst Stavro Blofeld.
Dr. No was also a member of SPECTRE
Re the trailer: I can't say I'm bothered by the recent James Bond films. The only one that I thought was any good was Casino Royale. QoS was crap and Skyfall was...OKish. The villains just don't seem to have any appeal
Yeah, I was making a Mission Impossible joke there...
Having said that, I'm not sure I remembered what SPECTRE stood for, so thanks for that!
SPECTRE is a criminal organisation in the James Bond-verse.
It stands for Special Executive for Counter-intelligence, Terrorism, Revenge and Extortion led by Ernst Stavro Blofeld.
Dr. No was also a member of SPECTRE
Re the trailer: I can't say I'm bothered by the recent James Bond films. The only one that I thought was any good was Casino Royale. QoS was crap and Skyfall was...OKish. The villains just don't seem to have any appeal
SPECTRE is a criminal organisation in the James Bond-verse.
It stands for Special Executive for Counter-intelligence, Terrorism, Revenge and Extortion led by Ernst Stavro Blofeld.
Dr. No was also a member of SPECTRE
Re the trailer: I can't say I'm bothered by the recent James Bond films. The only one that I thought was any good was Casino Royale. QoS was crap and Skyfall was...OKish. The villains just don't seem to have any appeal
Feel the same way.
Agreed - I prefered the older stuff - but that might cos I am old :(
It's funny you guys say that; Personally I think with Craig at the helm the last 3 films have all been among the best, Skyfall topping all the ones I've seen (most of them) and being one of my favourite films of all time.
Since Daniel Craig's dramatic entrance in Casino Royale, Bond has been a vulnerable tortured soul, carrying this through in Quantum of Solace and Skyfall. The latter turned back the clock as 007 returned to his family home in Scotland, giving rare psychological insight into a man who's remained a mystery for the best part of 50 years.
The just-released trailer for Spectre, an atmospheric, bleak and action-less 90 seconds, looks to be continuing that tradition. There were no explosions or gun shots in sight, but this teaser is loaded with intrigue and plenty to dig into for those Bond fans familiar with the early instalments revolving around sinister crime syndicate SPECTRE (Special Executive for Counter-intelligence, Terrorism, Revenge and Extortion, in case you didn't know).
Spectre's trailer sets its scene with a shot of the MI6 building still in ruins after the events of the previous film. Moneypenny hands over to Bond all that remains from Silva's assault on his ancestral home at Skyfall Lodge.
There's a charred photograph of a young Bond with a man and what looks like an older boy whose face can't be seen. And a certificate of temporary guardianship transferring a 12-year-old James from the care of his aunt Charmian into the care of Hannes Oberhauser. In Fleming's novel You Only Live Twice, it's revealed that Charmian briefly took care of Bond after his parents died in a mountain climbing accident.
Oberhauser, Bond's skiing instructor and surrogate father figure, was first mentioned in Fleming's Octopussy and later revisited in Charlie Higson's young 007 novel By Royal Command. It is, of course, common knowledge that Christoph Waltz is playing Franz Oberhauser, presumably the son of Hans.
However, Spectre's trailer (along with much online speculation) seems to make one thing abundantly clear: this film marks the return of Ernst Stavro Blofeld.
If Skyfall quickly swept the Quantum organisation under the carpet, then Spectre looks to have found a way to weave them back into Bond movie canon. Mr White (Jesper Christensen) is back, battered and bruised (by Bond? His puppet master?) in a secluded chalet with the answers to help unravel a fresh mission.
Bond fans who've seen Sean Connery's classic '60s outings will immediately recognise this octopus emblem signet ring as the mark of a Spectre agent.
It's the trailer's closing moments that really solidify Spectre's nod to its illustrious predecessors. Notes from the iconic theme music tinkle as Bond looks out over a long table with sinister suited types gathered. The head of the table? A man concealed from view, "Number 1", aka Blofeld, just as he was 50 years ago in the scene from Thunderball below.
"Welcome, James. It's been a long time. Now finally, here we are," says Waltz's shadowy villain. There's double-edged meaning here, with the character re-introducing himself to filmgoers after a 30-year absence (remember Roger Moore dropping him down a chimney?) and signalling an apparent reunion with Bond. Could they be brothers-turned-mortal enemies? Or are we being John Harrisoned here, with the name Oberhauser a misdirect to draw Bond out and into the crosshairs?
Paradigm wrote: It's funny you guys say that; Personally I think with Craig at the helm the last 3 films have all been among the best, Skyfall topping all the ones I've seen (most of them) and being one of my favourite films of all time.
Well its films so its subjective - I miss the gadets and more girls.......... Plus I thought the "story" in 2 was a uncomfortable mix of the newer "grtitty" style and the older outlandish plot - the water stealing plot being especially poor. The Villian in 3 did not convince me either.
Personally I don't want to know anything more about Bond or his family - sounds terrible......
Since Daniel Craig's dramatic entrance in Casino Royale, Bond has been a vulnerable tortured soul, carrying this through in Quantum of Solace and Skyfall. The latter turned back the clock as 007 returned to his family home in Scotland, giving rare psychological insight into a man who's remained a mystery for the best part of 50 years.
The just-released trailer for Spectre, an atmospheric, bleak and action-less 90 seconds, looks to be continuing that tradition. There were no explosions or gun shots in sight, but this teaser is loaded with intrigue and plenty to dig into for those Bond fans familiar with the early instalments revolving around sinister crime syndicate SPECTRE (Special Executive for Counter-intelligence, Terrorism, Revenge and Extortion, in case you didn't know).
Spectre's trailer sets its scene with a shot of the MI6 building still in ruins after the events of the previous film. Moneypenny hands over to Bond all that remains from Silva's assault on his ancestral home at Skyfall Lodge.
There's a charred photograph of a young Bond with a man and what looks like an older boy whose face can't be seen. And a certificate of temporary guardianship transferring a 12-year-old James from the care of his aunt Charmian into the care of Hannes Oberhauser. In Fleming's novel You Only Live Twice, it's revealed that Charmian briefly took care of Bond after his parents died in a mountain climbing accident.
Oberhauser, Bond's skiing instructor and surrogate father figure, was first mentioned in Fleming's Octopussy and later revisited in Charlie Higson's young 007 novel By Royal Command. It is, of course, common knowledge that Christoph Waltz is playing Franz Oberhauser, presumably the son of Hans.
However, Spectre's trailer (along with much online speculation) seems to make one thing abundantly clear: this film marks the return of Ernst Stavro Blofeld.
If Skyfall quickly swept the Quantum organisation under the carpet, then Spectre looks to have found a way to weave them back into Bond movie canon. Mr White (Jesper Christensen) is back, battered and bruised (by Bond? His puppet master?) in a secluded chalet with the answers to help unravel a fresh mission.
Bond fans who've seen Sean Connery's classic '60s outings will immediately recognise this octopus emblem signet ring as the mark of a Spectre agent.
It's the trailer's closing moments that really solidify Spectre's nod to its illustrious predecessors. Notes from the iconic theme music tinkle as Bond looks out over a long table with sinister suited types gathered. The head of the table? A man concealed from view, "Number 1", aka Blofeld, just as he was 50 years ago in the scene from Thunderball below.
"Welcome, James. It's been a long time. Now finally, here we are," says Waltz's shadowy villain. There's double-edged meaning here, with the character re-introducing himself to filmgoers after a 30-year absence (remember Roger Moore dropping him down a chimney?) and signalling an apparent reunion with Bond. Could they be brothers-turned-mortal enemies? Or are we being John Harrisoned here, with the name Oberhauser a misdirect to draw Bond out and into the crosshairs?
As I've said before, if you put SPECTRE and Franz Oberhauser side by side to compare them, you'll notice that they both contain an E, an S, and an R.
Paradigm wrote: It's funny you guys say that; Personally I think with Craig at the helm the last 3 films have all been among the best, Skyfall topping all the ones I've seen (most of them) and being one of my favourite films of all time.
Well its films so its subjective - I miss the gadets and more girls.......... Plus I thought the "story" in 2 was a uncomfortable mix of the newer "grtitty" style and the older outlandish plot - the water stealing plot being especially poor. The Villian in 3 did not convince me either.
Personally I don't want to know anything more about Bond or his family - sounds terrible......
I'm in the same boat as you - the day Roger Moore returns to Bond in a safari suit, I'll weep with joy, but I love the new films as much as the old films. Probably more.
Paradigm wrote: It's funny you guys say that; Personally I think with Craig at the helm the last 3 films have all been among the best, Skyfall topping all the ones I've seen (most of them) and being one of my favourite films of all time.
To clarify- nothing wrong with Daniel Craig as Bond- he's perfect for the role. It's the storytelling I take issue with.
Le Chiffre= evil gambler who makes a shed load of cash for terrorists. Pretty good stuff.
Dominic Greene= evil green technology developer trying to help a bolivian general stage a coup to own...water. Meh.
Silva= survivor of cyanide capsule ingestion peed off at M and trying to destroy MI6. Interesting but a pretty crappy villain.
Give me Goldfinger or Moonraker anyday over that lot.
Paradigm wrote: It's funny you guys say that; Personally I think with Craig at the helm the last 3 films have all been among the best, Skyfall topping all the ones I've seen (most of them) and being one of my favourite films of all time.
To clarify- nothing wrong with Daniel Craig as Bond- he's perfect for the role. It's the storytelling I take issue with.
Le Chiffre= evil gambler who makes a shed load of cash for terrorists. Pretty good stuff.
Dominic Greene= evil green technology developer trying to help a bolivian general stage a coup to own...water. Meh.
Silva= survivor of cyanide capsule ingestion peed off at M and trying to destroy MI6. Interesting but a pretty crappy villain.
Give me Goldfinger or Moonraker anyday over that lot.
Fair enough!
I imagine some of it might be down to the fact I didn't grow up with the older Bonds (Die Another Day was my first, Casino Royale was the first I really paid attention to), so it's not so 'different' to me. I like the more personal side of it (which is why I love Skyfall so much, it's actually about Bond rather than about Bond doing stuff). The gadgets, girls and witty one-liners of the older stuff does have an appeal of it's own, and most of them are still great films and just fun, but personally I'd rather have the newer stuff.
The Craig era is my Bond in the same way as the Tennant era is my Dr Who; there's been great stuff before and will probably be some great stuff after, but if I have to pick only one, it's that one.
Don't forget QoS had only a rough draft to work with and that the director and Craig had to improvise as they went along since the Writer's Strike didn't allow for a writer to help with the script in any way.
Ahtman wrote: Don't forget QoS had only a rough draft to work with and that the director and Craig had to improvise as they went along since the Writer's Strike didn't allow for a writer to help with the script in any way.
Ah yes. That silly nonsense. Did that strike actually get them anywhere?
Ahtman wrote: Don't forget QoS had only a rough draft to work with and that the director and Craig had to improvise as they went along since the Writer's Strike didn't allow for a writer to help with the script in any way.
Ah yes. That silly nonsense. Did that strike actually get them anywhere?
Craigs been growing on me throughout the series even though CR was average and QoS was gak.
Enjoyed Skyfall to be fair and latest trailer looks decent.
Looking forward to this, loved Skyfall and this looks to be following a similar direction in terms of plot and tone.
I do have one complaint about the trailer though, not enough of the new Aston Martin. Though I only say that because I was involved with building the cars they used for filming.
I do have one complaint about the trailer though, not enough of the new Aston Martin. Though I only say that because I was involved with building the cars they used for filming.
Lucky bastard! that new Aston looks awesome!
Not quite as nice as the DB5, but then few cars are!
I do have one complaint about the trailer though, not enough of the new Aston Martin. Though I only say that because I was involved with building the cars they used for filming.
Lucky bastard! that new Aston looks awesome!
Not quite as nice as the DB5, but then few cars are!
Yeah it's going to be a bit weird seeing carbon fibre parts I made up on screen.
Trailer looks neat, though I'm still pretty skeptical. I LOVED Casino Royale but the other two movies put me to sleep. It didn't help that Skyfall borrowed SO heavily from the Nolan Batman movies. I'll probably still watch Spectre in theaters, but I don't think Craig is ever gonna top his first outing as Bond.
Finally able to sit down and watch the trailer here.... I am cautiously optimistic. to say the least.
I just feel that there's been quite a few movies/series that Ive really enjoyed and seen an awesome trailer for the next installment (or release for the one off films) and been burned by an awesome trailer that translated to a mediocre film.
With the recent casting announcements and all, I am leaning more towards the fanboy side and less the cautious side though should be good.
As far as I am concerned, there have been only two James Bonds.
That of Sean Connery, and that of Daniel Craig.
Roger Moore was really too old for the part, and . . . Well, I would have to look up names to find those who followed Moore.
But Daniel Craig, and the team behind the most recent have concocted a potent mix of novelty and nostalgia to give us something that appeals to both newer and older fans of Bond.
And it gives us a link between past and present, between Cold War and the New World.
Paradigm wrote: The best thing I took from that is that the DB10 shoots flames out the back... Which is just about the only way that car could be cooler!
Red paint job?
GG
Automatically Appended Next Post:
BeAfraid wrote: As far as I am concerned, there have been only two James Bonds.
That of Sean Connery, and that of Daniel Craig.
Roger Moore was really too old for the part, and . . . Well, I would have to look up names to find those who followed Moore.
But Daniel Craig, and the team behind the most recent have concocted a potent mix of novelty and nostalgia to give us something that appeals to both newer and older fans of Bond.
And it gives us a link between past and present, between Cold War and the New World.
MB
I don't know...Roger Moore was pretty good in "Live and Let Die", "Man with the Golden gun".
But to be honest he suffered from the same problem Connery did in the later films, which is to say they got too silly.
BeAfraid wrote: As far as I am concerned, there have been only two James Bonds.
That of Sean Connery, and that of Daniel Craig.
Roger Moore was really too old for the part, and . . . Well, I would have to look up names to find those who followed Moore.
But Daniel Craig, and the team behind the most recent have concocted a potent mix of novelty and nostalgia to give us something that appeals to both newer and older fans of Bond.
And it gives us a link between past and present, between Cold War and the New World.
MB
If you're a fan of those two, I'd certainly suggest checking out the Timothy Dalton ones, particularly Licence To Kill. They're fun without the silliness of the Moore stuff, dark without going quite as gritty as the newest ones.
You may also like some of the Pierce Brosnan ones as well.
And the silliness of the latter Connery and most (if not all) of the Moore Bomd Films is just too much to bear.
It is a pity that Timothy Dalton wasn't younger, as he would have been pretty good with a decade shaved from his age.
I think the Daniel Craig films have hit a sweet spot with Bond, though.
Just the right mix of modern novelty and past nostalgia.
I am willing to bet (I wish there was someplace to record this for posterity, so that I could either say "I told you so" or be mocked for it) that once they replace Daniel Craig, that the next Bond will pay homage to Roger Moore.
I LOVED Roger Moore as The Saint (which is what got him the job as Bond), but the 1970's were not kind to anyone but Glam Rock and Punk.
It looks promising but I'll wait to hear from friends if it was good. I wasn't happy when I paid 10$ for the flaming bag of dog crap that was Skyfall. I can't remember a theatrical release with more plot holes.
Wraithlordmechanic wrote: It looks promising but I'll wait to hear from friends if it was good. I wasn't happy when I paid 10$ for the flaming bag of dog crap that was Skyfall. I can't remember a theatrical release with more plot holes.
The one before it was much worse..........
Might go and watch it with friends - unless something better one - I liked the old gadgets and girls more - or Kingsman
It might be time to give up on the current Bond series!
I just thought it was very average - not as bad as the second one but merely meh............. I was hoping the fourth one would be more to my liking..........
I think the core of what bothers me about that movie isn't even in those videos and it is twofold:
first, Bond is not fit to be an agent as he fails basic tests to certify. I don't know about you, but I prefer Bond to be competent.
Second, he fails. It was his job to protect her and she dies. Not only that, but she dies because he decided to play home alone with the bad guys. And to top it all off, when he goes back to work everyone is cool with how he so utterly failed.
I know I'm supposed to go along with all of this for the sake of fun, but all this stuff served to shatter my willing suspension of disbelief.
first, Bond is not fit to be an agent as he fails basic tests to certify. I don't know about you, but I prefer Bond to be competent.
Personally, I think that if you were to give bond those same tests before or after the events of Casino Royale, or most any of the previous films, he'd fail them. IMO, he should ALWAYS fail the "clinical tests" precisely because he's a field agent and has the instinctive ability to "switch it on" in life or death situations.
The second part, I'm more sympathetic to you, because his job was to protect her... But at the same time, with the levels of techno spying available, the whole aspect of "who works for Spectre that we don't know about?" combine to create a situation where the only real option is to get off the grid. Of course, in the British Isles, about the only way to get off the grid, is to go to a place like Skyfall.
first, Bond is not fit to be an agent as he fails basic tests to certify. I don't know about you, but I prefer Bond to be competent.
Personally, I think that if you were to give bond those same tests before or after the events of Casino Royale, or most any of the previous films, he'd fail them. IMO, he should ALWAYS fail the "clinical tests" precisely because he's a field agent and has the instinctive ability to "switch it on" in life or death situations.
The second part, I'm more sympathetic to you, because his job was to protect her... But at the same time, with the levels of techno spying available, the whole aspect of "who works for Spectre that we don't know about?" combine to create a situation where the only real option is to get off the grid. Of course, in the British Isles, about the only way to get off the grid, is to go to a place like Skyfall.
Indeed. I'd also add that the ending is one of the reasons Skyfall stands out from the rest; how often do we see Bond fail, or at the least win at very, very great cost? Yeah, he's supposed to win all the time, that's just who he is, but I for one greatly appreciated Skyfall changing the formula and making the whole thing a bit more personal.
It reminds us that Bond is human, that he does have weaknesses, and that he can fail.
Wraithlordmechanic wrote: I think the core of what bothers me about that movie isn't even in those videos and it is twofold:
first, Bond is not fit to be an agent as he fails basic tests to certify. I don't know about you, but I prefer Bond to be competent.
Second, he fails. It was his job to protect her and she dies. Not only that, but she dies because he decided to play home alone with the bad guys. And to top it all off, when he goes back to work everyone is cool with how he so utterly failed.
I know I'm supposed to go along with all of this for the sake of fun, but all this stuff served to shatter my willing suspension of disbelief.
first, Bond is not fit to be an agent as he fails basic tests to certify. I don't know about you, but I prefer Bond to be competent.
Personally, I think that if you were to give bond those same tests before or after the events of Casino Royale, or most any of the previous films, he'd fail them. IMO, he should ALWAYS fail the "clinical tests" precisely because he's a field agent and has the instinctive ability to "switch it on" in life or death situations.
The second part, I'm more sympathetic to you, because his job was to protect her... But at the same time, with the levels of techno spying available, the whole aspect of "who works for Spectre that we don't know about?" combine to create a situation where the only real option is to get off the grid. Of course, in the British Isles, about the only way to get off the grid, is to go to a place like Skyfall.
Indeed. I'd also add that the ending is one of the reasons Skyfall stands out from the rest; how often do we see Bond fail, or at the least win at very, very great cost? Yeah, he's supposed to win all the time, that's just who he is, but I for one greatly appreciated Skyfall changing the formula and making the whole thing a bit more personal.
It reminds us that Bond is human, that he does have weaknesses, and that he can fail.
er most of the time - most of the films have him making major mistakes, getting plenty of allies (usually pretty girls but not always) killed - agreed he normally comes through "in the end" but seldom without substantial cost - sometimes even people he cares about...........
This has been true since the very beginning - just used to be a bit of humour and fun gadgets to balance the bad stuff
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: Bond theme tunes are a strange thing, most of them, quite frankly, are dire, but I've still got nearly all of them on the old CD box set
When Spectre is released, I'll be blasting them out in celebration. Sorry neighbours
On a separate note, has anybody tried doing an Alan Partridge: watch every Bond film back to back?
I tried it 2 years ago, but I couldn't go the distance
Can you sleep at any point? We need rules and criteria man! This is a nerd forum!
I honestly think Octopussy or Man with the Golden Gun would kill me during such a marathon. If they failed, Never Say Never again would surely do the job.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: Bond theme tunes are a strange thing, most of them, quite frankly, are dire, but I've still got nearly all of them on the old CD box set
When Spectre is released, I'll be blasting them out in celebration. Sorry neighbours
On a separate note, has anybody tried doing an Alan Partridge: watch every Bond film back to back?
I tried it 2 years ago, but I couldn't go the distance
Can you sleep at any point? We need rules and criteria man! This is a nerd forum!
I honestly think Octopussy or Man with the Golden Gun would kill me during such a marathon. If they failed, Never Say Never again would surely do the job.
Sleeping's cheating. Energy drinks are recommended. Toilet breaks are only permitted during the end credits.
It opens ok and then the vocals kick in and I have to switch it off lol. Sam Smith is NOT Bond theme song material. Give us Chris Cornell(Soundgarden/Audioslave)- loved his Casino Royale theme song.
i have to say, i really like Craig as Bond...
Casino Royale is my favorite Bond movie...
Craig won me over in Layer Cake, so to see him end up as the new Bond was awesome...
Sean Connery is still my favorite Bond, though...
he taught me how to approach the ladies with style, flair, and complete recklessness...
plus he had the best accent...
looking forward to SPECTRE...
Bond movies are always good to paint to...
explosions and gunfire are like meditation when painting Space Marines...
It's out now, so while I haven't seen the film and probably won't for a bit, I've edited the title with spoiler warnings so feel free to discuss the movie here and save on duplicate threads.
Paradigm wrote: It's out now, so while I haven't seen the film and probably won't for a bit, I've edited the title with spoiler warnings so feel free to discuss the movie here and save on duplicate threads.
Not much discussion going on. I must be the only person on dakka who's watched it
Well, what can I say except it was pretty good. If you liked skyfall, you'll like this. If you didn't like skyfall, then there's no hope for you
As for plot, I can safely say that I'm not spoiling anything by revealing there was a villain, fast cars, and faster women...and a helicopter.
Same as any other Bond film. Still love them, though
YES! A villain with a secret base in a crater! Something that's been criminally missing from the last few films.
OK, the plot was a little weak - an awful lot of stuff was either assumed or left on the cutting room floor. It managed to crack on pretty well, though.
Given who the head of British Intelligence was, though, a cameo from Benedict Cumberbatch or Mark Gatiss wouldn't have gone amiss,
Spoiler:
It wasn;t until the white cat showed up that I was sure they were reintroducing Blofeld. WIth hindsight, the Nehru jacket gave it away, too.
But a lot of the fight scenes just felt kind of ... flat ..? ... or not especially gripping.
Monica Bellucci is criminally underused, I much preferred her character than Dr Swan.
To much hand waving plot wise and some really odd decisions in parts too.
Almost felt like a tribute act, if you follow.
Kingsmen was a much film overall.
Just been and watched it again, and yeah, it does seem a bit Roger Moore-ish in parts, but hell, this is Bond. You knew the plot before you even walked into the cinema!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AndrewGPaul wrote: YES! A villain with a secret base in a crater! Something that's been criminally missing from the last few films.
OK, the plot was a little weak - an awful lot of stuff was either assumed or left on the cutting room floor. It managed to crack on pretty well, though.
Given who the head of British Intelligence was, though, a cameo from Benedict Cumberbatch or Mark Gatiss wouldn't have gone amiss,
Spoiler:
It wasn;t until the white cat showed up that I was sure they were reintroducing Blofeld. WIth hindsight, the Nehru jacket gave it away, too.
Comparisons were made with QOS, but SPECTRE was far superior to that.
Spoiler:
Glad they left you know who alive at the end. Too good a villain to kill...again!
Sounds like I won't need to waste 2hrs of my life on this then. I think Casino Royale is the best one of the Craig series. I'm not really a fan of this Sam Mendes director. It feels a lot like he's trying too hard and it ruins the end result.
Sam Smith has an awful whiney voice and ruined quite a good intro.
Bond gets no gadgets.
You shouldn't throw someone off a train tied to a load of beer kegs without making a quip.
Meh.
The End.
In a word. Fantastic. In two, bloody fantastic! Or so I thought at least! I thought the whole thing was really rather spectacular (SPECTRE-tacular?) in all departments really! It even tops Skyfall!
Spoiler:
In particular, I liked the fact that it brought together all the loose ends from the last 3 films to really cement all 4 together; you could watch Casino, Quantum, Skyfall and this together and it would tell a 'complete' story that can then go forward into more classic Bond.
Ralph Finnes definitely passes the test as M, Judi Dench was a tough act to follow but he pulled it off. Nice to see the supporting cast of him, Tanner, Q and Moneypenny getting involved more this time, rather than just backing up Bond from a desk.
Opening title visuals were excellent, loved the flashbacks/references to the last 3 films. Shame about the song, it was musically and lyrically quite good but the performance was terrible. Lower the whole thing by an octave or two and get someone who could sing and it could have been great.
I did feel Andrew Scott was somewhat underused once Oberhauser/Blofeld came onto the scene, but that's only a minor point. The only major 'issue' I had was the drill thing being mentioned as messing up Bond's balance, hearing and coordination and still he was able to escape gunning down the entirety of SPECTRE's security with single shots... but if anyone can do that, it's Bond, so you won't find me complaining!
In short, it can enjoy being the best film of 2015 (sorry, Age of Ultron) until December 16th....
Paradigm wrote: In a word. Fantastic. In two, bloody fantastic! Or so I thought at least! I thought the whole thing was really rather spectacular (SPECTRE-tacular?) in all departments really! It even tops Skyfall!
Spoiler:
In particular, I liked the fact that it brought together all the loose ends from the last 3 films to really cement all 4 together; you could watch Casino, Quantum, Skyfall and this together and it would tell a 'complete' story that can then go forward into more classic Bond.
Ralph Finnes definitely passes the test as M, Judi Dench was a tough act to follow but he pulled it off. Nice to see the supporting cast of him, Tanner, Q and Moneypenny getting involved more this time, rather than just backing up Bond from a desk.
Opening title visuals were excellent, loved the flashbacks/references to the last 3 films. Shame about the song, it was musically and lyrically quite good but the performance was terrible. Lower the whole thing by an octave or two and get someone who could sing and it could have been great.
I did feel Andrew Scott was somewhat underused once Oberhauser/Blofeld came onto the scene, but that's only a minor point. The only major 'issue' I had was the drill thing being mentioned as messing up Bond's balance, hearing and coordination and still he was able to escape gunning down the entirety of SPECTRE's security with single shots... but if anyone can do that, it's Bond, so you won't find me complaining!
In short, it can enjoy being the best film of 2015 (sorry, Age of Ultron) until December 16th....
Agree about the tying up of loose ends. I this was done deliberately to not only tie up the story arc, but to allow Daniel Craig to retire.
We're getting a new Bond.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Alex Kolodotschko wrote: Sam Smith has an awful whiney voice and ruined quite a good intro.
Bond gets no gadgets.
You shouldn't throw someone off a train tied to a load of beer kegs without making a quip.
Meh.
The End.
Bond films having rubbish theme tunes is not exactly new
So who for the next Bond, then? My vote would go to Michael Fassbender, or failing that, Tom Hiddleston. I think either of them could pull it off, but I'd rather have a more mature actor to follow on where Craig leaves off.
Paradigm wrote: So who for the next Bond, then? My vote would go to Michael Fassbender, or failing that, Tom Hiddleston. I think either of them could pull it off, but I'd rather have a more mature actor to follow on where Craig leaves off.
It has all the parts that make it sound great on paper but it just felt 'meh' to me; it felt more like I should like the film than actually liking it. I'm glad I saw it but it just didn't seem like the disparate parts made up a whole.
I guess this is a bit spoilerish so I will put it in spoilers. Even though Craig has said he was done one of the Bond producers disagreed. Sam Mendes also said he would direct another Bond film after Skyfall either so who knows.
Spoiler:
Honestly I would be fine if Craig does one more film that ties it all up in that we don't know with certainty that Hinx (Dave Bautista) is dead for sure and Blofeld is still alive. If the next film started with Hinx killing the girl Bond went off with at the end of SPECTRE. It would be even better if they were married as in the original films and book as Blofeld is directly responsible for the death of Bond's wife. While Bond is dealing with that henchman break Blofeld out of wherever they are keeping him. After all this the chase is on to find and stop SPECTRE and Blofeld. In the end Bond would fight Hinx and barely defeat him, then have to fight Blofeld. It would be a bit fairer as Bond would be pretty messed up after the Hinx fight. Personally I would have them pull a Death of Sherlock Holmes and have Blofeld and Bond kill each other, thus giving Bond a noble sacrifice and bringing the Craig era to an official end. They could then start over without concern.
Ahtman wrote: I guess this is a bit spoilerish so I will put it in spoilers. Even though Craig has said he was done one of the Bond producers disagreed. Sam Mendes also said he would direct another Bond film after Skyfall either so who knows.
Spoiler:
Honestly I would be fine if Craig does one more film that ties it all up in that we don't know with certainty that Hinx (Dave Bautista) is dead for sure and Blofeld is still alive. If the next film started with Hinx killing the girl Bond went off with at the end of SPECTRE. It would be even better if they were married as in the original films and book as Blofeld is directly responsible for the death of Bond's wife. While Bond is dealing with that henchman break Blofeld out of wherever they are keeping him. After all this the chase is on to find and stop SPECTRE and Blofeld. In the end Bond would fight Hinx and barely defeat him, then have to fight Blofeld. It would be a bit fairer as Bond would be pretty messed up after the Hinx fight. Personally I would have them pull a Death of Sherlock Holmes and have Blofeld and Bond kill each other, thus giving Bond a noble sacrifice and bringing the Craig era to an official end. They could then start over without concern.
Pretty neat idea. I think we can all agree that
Spoiler:
Madaline Swan is going to die in the opening minutes of the next film, can't have Bond being too happy! I doubt Hinx would make a comeback, but sinister henchmen are 10 a penny in Bond's world so there is plenty of scope there. Blofeld definitely needs to feature in the next one, a) because he was great and b) because, as you say, it would then bring this era on Bond to a nice close.
I've loved the 1st 3 Daniel Craig Bond movies, but I felt indifferent to Spectre. I have no idea way, but it just didn't do anything for me. Just out of interest did anybody else feel that the usual change from the intro action to the theme song was a bit flat? The other 3 went from a "POW!" scene into the intro track, this one to me just seemed 'meh'.
I just saw the movie yesterday, and I liked it, but not as much as Skyfall.
Spoiler:
I liked the stuff that seemed like a wink and a nod to the older movies; like when Bond and Dr. Swan get taken to the crater base (like You Only Live Twice) and given those nice rooms (like Dr. No). I did expect Dave Bautista to show up at the end and possibly kill Dr. Swan (a tragedy because she was so HAWT!), or at least for Bond to have to defeat him again. Indeed, Bautista's character felt like a throwback to the old movies where there was a stupidly tough henchman (Jaws, Oddjob, etc.). After hearing about how Monica Belucci is now officially the oldest Bond girl actress ever (at 50), I was disappointed that she wasn't in the movie very much. I wouldn't have minded her having a bigger role. Overall the action was good, and it was nice to see them finally add the character of Ernst Stavro Blofeld to the newer movies, complete with his trademark Persian cat.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: I've yet to hear of anybody take up the challenge of watching every Bond film back to back.
I'm going to give it a go over the Christmas holidays, finishing with a trip to the cinema to watch SPECTRE...again
I'm not sure if it still happens but a bond marathon was played on TNT over thanksgiving weekend every year for a while there. So I don't think I've done them all back to back but I've come close.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: I've yet to hear of anybody take up the challenge of watching every Bond film back to back.
I'm going to give it a go over the Christmas holidays, finishing with a trip to the cinema to watch SPECTRE...again
I'm not sure if it still happens but a bond marathon was played on TNT over thanksgiving weekend every year for a while there. So I don't think I've done them all back to back but I've come close.
Close is not close enough
TBO, I can't criticise, I've failed myself many a time
angelofvengeance wrote: Sounds like I won't need to waste 2hrs of my life on this then. I think Casino Royale is the best one of the Craig series. I'm not really a fan of this Sam Mendes director. It feels a lot like he's trying too hard and it ruins the end result.
Mendes's non-Bond films were great, but I agree that the only decent Bond movie of Craig's run was Casino Royale (which was fantastic).
Paradigm wrote: So who for the next Bond, then? My vote would go to Michael Fassbender, or failing that, Tom Hiddleston. I think either of them could pull it off, but I'd rather have a more mature actor to follow on where Craig leaves off.
Idris Elba is a natural.
Tom Hardy as well, but he's already substantially bigger than Bond.
Saw Skyfall this weekend.
Spoiler:
-Mexico scenes were great. Wife now wants to find that parade and go to it.
-The Bond finding his family or whatever seems like a plot that could have been explored better, or dropped completely.
-Blofield's character could have been done better. He creates this super organization, and can make Machiavelli look like a playdoll, but the whole movie is because he has DADDY ISSUES? ? ?
-Same for M. Fiennes is way better than this part. he couldn't do anything with the role.
-French chick was very French. -The action at the end felt contrived. I was not a fan, when they've done this better, and were almost there.
-Whats with this new series torturing Bond all the time. They'd never actually torture Sean Connery, just threaten to and laugh maniacally. Come on, this isn't real life, this is a Bond film. If I want torture, I can just try to get a bus ride in the rain in the afternoon. Now thats torture.
angelofvengeance wrote: Sounds like I won't need to waste 2hrs of my life on this then. I think Casino Royale is the best one of the Craig series. I'm not really a fan of this Sam Mendes director. It feels a lot like he's trying too hard and it ruins the end result.
Mendes's non-Bond films were great, but I agree that the only decent Bond movie of Craig's run was Casino Royale (which was fantastic).
So, we've had a Scottish, an Australian, an English, a Welsh, an Irish and another English Bond. Time for another from the Celtic fringe? Any decent Manx actors out there that look good in a dinner suit?
I mean, Skyfall's plot was mostly made of holes, and not in the structurally sound, honeycomb construction kind of a way -- more in the bad D&D game full of more pit traps than is sensible, kind of a way.
But QoS didn't seem to bother with a plot at all. It gave the impression it'd been originally written as an FPS. Couple of big action scenes to show off, and then some shoddy, hack-written cut-scenes to join it together, that would have been better if they were skippable.
Saw it last night. Wow, this movie had no heart in it. Everyone was just mailing it in.
1. The Theme song is boring. Sam Smith.... I am not a fan. Too bad it sets the stage for the rest of the film.
2. The most boring car chase between super-cool sports cars I have ever seen. It is so slow and boring that even Bond has to call Moneypenny to spice it up.
3. Echoes of On Her majesty's Secret Service just reminded me how much that movie ruled compared to this one. I was hoping for a ski or Bobsled scene that never materialized.
4. The big reveal falls so flat and hollow it feels like an after thought. It felt a bit cartoonish actually.
5. All the action is relatively excitement free gun play.
6. The ending.... the ending....what have you wrought!
There was the occasional flash of cool, but overall it was just Meh. The two best parts are the part with the widow and when he has the bag over his head.
My vote for next Bond is Clive Owen. I have been saying so since before Craig was picked.
-Mexico scenes were great. Wife now wants to find that parade and go to it.
-The Bond finding his family or whatever seems like a plot that could have been explored better, or dropped completely.
-Blofield's character could have been done better. He creates this super organization, and can make Machiavelli look like a playdoll, but the whole movie is because he has DADDY ISSUES? ? ?
-Same for M. Fiennes is way better than this part. he couldn't do anything with the role.
-French chick was very French. -The action at the end felt contrived. I was not a fan, when they've done this better, and were almost there.
-Whats with this new series torturing Bond all the time. They'd never actually torture Sean Connery, just threaten to and laugh maniacally. Come on, this isn't real life, this is a Bond film. If I want torture, I can just try to get a bus ride in the rain in the afternoon. Now thats torture.
Great look.
