Films

[fatjim]

I haven't seen it but I think all bond films are either average or below average. Probably won't be going to see this one. Actually there is no probably about it. I won't be.

[Tyrant]

I haven't seen it but I think all bond films are either average or below average. Probably won't be going to see this one. Actually there is no probably about it. I won't be.

 

 

That settles it. I'm going to see it on Thursday.

[Andrew]

TLG - is there not quite a lot of nit picking in your post? Spoiler -  To worry about where he got patched up is a bit pedantic? And the villans grudge against M wasn't really that the cyinide would not work but more that she gave him up to the Chinese.

 

I was also really dissapointed that the Spectre/Quantom organisation wasn't in the film though. I was really hoping the Ralph Feins was going to be Blofed

[BigAl]

Didn't read TLG's post.

Heading to see it on Wednesday night.

Even if its shite, it'll still be the lesser of two evils as will miss all the begging little bastards coming round the doors

[tlg1903]

TLG - is there not quite a lot of nit picking in your post? Spoiler -  To worry about where he got patched up is a bit pedantic? And the villans grudge against M wasn't really that the cyinide would not work but more that she gave him up to the Chinese.

 

I was also really dissapointed that the Spectre/Quantom organisation wasn't in the film though. I was really hoping the Ralph Feins was going to be Blofed

 

Its not pedantic at all, hero takes two bullets then all of a sudden he is fine and in a bar and how this has happened is not even addressed, lazy film making in my eyes.  The cyanide thing was big motivation, he kept going on about how his insides had been burnt out (yet he seemed pretty healthy and mobile i might add).  I just found the whole villain back story pretty unimpressive and incredibly self serving.  I think it has only been done to get rid of Dench and return bond to its roots   

[dave_min]

 

Its not pedantic at all, hero takes two bullets then all of a sudden he is fine and in a bar and how this has happened is not even addressed, lazy film making in my eyes.  The cyanide thing was big motivation, he kept going on about how his insides had been burnt out (yet he seemed pretty healthy and mobile i might add).  I just found the whole villain back story pretty unimpressive and incredibly self serving.  I think it has only been done to get rid of Dench and return bond to its roots   

 

Wasn't the bad guy's problem that M had given him over to the Chinese as he had gone beyond what he was meant to have done in Hong Kong? The Cyanide thing was just a bit of a side-plot?

[Nellie The Don]

I stay in Wellington, NZ, but there's an Aberdeen woman in my (fairly small, about 10-strong) team of workmates who gave me this film to watch...

 

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1289420/

 

It's a pile of pish, relying on the fact that it's in Doric to hold any humour at all, but John Hewitt has a 5-second cameo as a juror near the end.

 

Anyway, Don't bother watching it. It's shite.

 

If you want to see John Hewitt, watch this instead.

 

[Superstar Tradesman]

Spoiler:-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Just kidding.

[Tyrant]

I went to see Bond last night (as promised) and I'm leaning more towards tlg's side tbh be honest. I enjoyed it in the end but I thought the start especially was so weak. To the white text..

 

First of all when Bond hops into the digger and spins the thing around why does he think the windscreen will protect him? Surely it was always a dead cert that he'd take at least 1 bullet? The villain is firing at him the whole time and he takes a shit to the right shoulder area. He's still mobile enough to jump out and battle on with this guy for 10 more minutes. Then Moneypenny takes him oot with a huge fuck off big rifle and he falls hunners of feet into water. Then he falls down water falls etc yet has no injuries besides the initial gunshot wound to the shoulder? He was blown away by a rifle apparently in the abdomen yet has no visible scar of this. Sorry if I sound pedantic but this stuff seems absolutely glaringly obvious to me. I also don't understand why there was conveniently an escape tunnel at the castle. If that was explained I missed it. 

[Superstar Tradesman]

Went to see Bond last night:

 

That's 3 films Daniel Craig has been in now and 3 films that seem to have been setting the scene.  Wish they'd just get on with it.

 

Gone are the cheesy one liners, "We don't do exploding pens", they've explained why Bond doesn't fall for these women, where he grew up, how he got into MI6, Miss Moneypenny, M, Q........ blah, blah, blah.  None of which I really care about, even less so that Bond isn't sure of himself, thinks he's passed it and all that shite.  They could have covered all that guff in the first film.  I just want to see him killing baddies with frisbee bowler hats and well, exploding pens.

[Kowalski]

Some of the best Bond films IMHO are not full of gadgets - see Dr No and From Russia With Love.  With Daniel Craig, they have taken Bond back to the early Connery days which is brilliant.

[tlg1903]

Some of the best ones have been full of gadgets too,  Goldfinger, thunderball, you only live twice, spy who loved me, goldeneye all had numerous toys and were great Bond films

[Kowalski]

Some of the best ones have been full of gadgets too,  Goldfinger, thunderball, you only live twice, spy who loved me, goldeneye all had numerous toys and were great Bond films

 

The first three on your list are amongst the best ever 

[bloo_toon_red]

It's always good to go and see Bond on the big screen.  I don't go to them expecting to see Oscar-nominated performances, it's just a bit of gaudy entertainment.

 

I think the reason that Casino Royale was such a good film in comparison to say the previous three (Goldeneye was a good film and the two Dalton ones were pretty good too in my opinion - The Living Daylights was the last of the classic formula Bond films), was that the screenplay stayed quite true to the book.  You could re-make every film as far back as Thunderball and get a completely different film if the screenplay followed the book, with the possible exception of OHMSS which is pretty close but includes parts of the plot of You Only Live Twice.  Licence to Kill was actually closer to the book version of Live and Let Die (and The Hildebrand Rarity) than the film itself was.

 

I'm intrigued as to what Fleming strand if any Skyfall follows.  With the exception of all of the Brosnan films, every film to date has taken at least something from the books.

[BigAl]

Fuck me...all this Bond talk makes me think i've stumbled onto the Hat of days gone by.

 

P.S In my opinon the film whilst reasonably enjoyable was still fairly weak and some of the continuity was appalling.

[tom_widdows]

Some of the best ones have been full of gadgets too,  Goldfinger, thunderball, you only live twice, spy who loved me, goldeneye all had numerous toys and were great Bond films

 

Dont recall that many if any gadgets in Goldeneye?

Certainly not enough to rival Goldfinger, Moonraker etc

[Superstar Tradesman]

Dont recall that many if any gadgets in Goldeneye?

Certainly not enough to rival Goldfinger, Moonraker etc

 

It wasn't just about the gadgets though, there were the 'cool' espionage 'tricks' like sticking a hair across a door to see if it had been opened, writing secret messages on mirrors that would be revealed when the hot tap was turned on, or killing a snake with a cigar and deoderant spray that made Bond a cut above the rest.

 

Without that shiznit he's just John MacLean in a suit, minus the banter.

 

As someone else said earlier; 'it's trying too hard to be other films'.

[Kowalski]

IMHO opinion the worst Bond films were the Roger Moore ones because there was too much focus on gadgets, stupid jokes, safari suits and glamorous locations, and less about good story telling and proper action.

 

The early Connery films and the Daniel Craig films are where its at for me, all much closer to Fleming's original view of Bond.

 

"it's trying too hard to be other films" - yes, they're trying to take Bond back to the days of Dr No and From Russia With Love.

[fatjim]

Seems also like they saw what can be down with films like the Bourne films and try to focus more on the action.

I personally think the bourne films are what Bond could be but bourne films are better.

[CtS]

Saw Skyfall last night, thought it was ok but they missed an absolute sitter with the ending.  I thought of a much cooler ending that included M saying 'Take the shot', which would have been relevant, exciting, and a lot fucking cooler than having her bleed to death on the fucking carpet.

 

PS don't read this post if you don't want to know that M dies at the end. 

[Kowalski]

Trailer for the Brad Pitt Zombie movie filmed in Glasgow:

 

[Superstar Tradesman]

Looked like the finished article to me.

 

Why the June 2013 release date?

[Madbadteacher]

To cash in on the Summer "blockbuster" crowd?

[TENEMENTFUNSTER]

Watched "I spit on your grave [unrated]" offa itunes the other night... BRUTAL!!!

 

Some of the most graphic torture scenes in any film ever I would guess 

 

One of the "video nasty" generation of movies, a classic!

[El Padre™]

Saw "Argo" and "Rust and Bone" last week. Fantastic films, especially "Rust and Bone". Well worth getting along to see.