Hatebox

And most of them feel it.

Two big problems with this movie: 1) The first half is Bond coming back to MI6, but we've already had that plot in Skyfall. There's a real sense of diminishing returns here. We've been through this already. 2) Thematically it's Craig's most serious movie by far and yet someone decided this was the film for his Bond to be lighthearted. It really jars, and I can't help but look at you, Phoebe Waller-Bridgers. I did like quite a lot else about it but I really, really hope the next iteration is content with simple standalone adventures and 100 minute run-times.

I also rewatched the sequels recently. My main takeaway was that the long talky 'boring' parts were actually a lot more interesting than the action. I think this is because the first movie told story through its action scenes. Neo gets better and better as it goes along and we learn about him and the Matrix. There is no similar growth or enlightenment in the sequels' action. Not with the multiple Smiths fight, not with the freeway chase, not with the Zion assault. Even the final Smith fight feels a bit pointless given Neo's eventual goal to 'surrender' anyway. So those parts were boring. But between that there are great ideas: rogue programs, Matrix reboots, machine exiles, Smith as an out of control virus, etc. It's not amazing but it's there. I'm sure if someone came up with the whole idea now it'd be an expensive tv show instead.

Spectre in a nutshell: Bond hunts for the mysterious guy he captured at the end of CR (who then escaped in QoS) and ends up getting with his daughter. It is also revealed that Christopher Waltz is Blofeld, head of the Spectre terrorist group, whose family briefly took a young Bond in. This made Blofeld jealous and, er, he became a criminal mastermind. Eventually he's captured. It's a shame this movie will apparently stick with serialization but I can't imagine needing to know much else.

I guess a multi-millionaire actor beating a multi-billion dollar conglomerate still... kind of counts as David beating Goliath.

Your trolling is getting boring.

Yup, I like Skyfall but that always bugged the hell out of me. They wanted it both ways and it's jarring if you rewatch them in order.

I'm guessing it'll end up in the 70s. The reviewers that like it seem to really like it, though.

Reviews are about as good as could be expected after those god-awful trailers. Reading some of them it sounds like my two concerns (serialization and bloated runtime) were warranted, but I also think that if any Bond movie is critic-proof it'll be this one. People decided long before reviews whether they were going to go out and see it.

It'll make a quarter of that in the UK alone.

Booked tickets for Saturday. My local has put on about 356 showings a day going by the website. Clearly expected to be the big post-covid movie in the UK, unsurprisingly.

1989 was an insanely competitive summer + it had a famously awful marketing campaign hindered by a last minute title change.

Unpopular opinion: I don't care for the long opening shot on Spectre. It adds nothing and stops for no reason. If Mendes had the courage/ability to make the entire pre-credits sequence one shot and incorporate the action scene into it then maybe it could have been praise-worthy.

🙃

Problematic™ moments aside, Skyfall is good because it has a lean plot, and you're rarely asking 'why are these people here' or 'why is this person doing this'. I've been watching a lot of the older movies as they've been on tv recently and come to the conclusion that the foundation for a decent Bond movie is simply: do I understand what the hell is going on. It's certainly not a given for each entry. I'm not entirely convinced Diamonds Are Forever had a script.

Just have a movie that heavily features Mads and Jude Law interacting/facing-off and you could have something good. It's a pity Eddie Redmayne has to be there at all.

Fucking hell.

Started reading the book, as I'd meant to for years. It's more accessible than I expected, a fuck-ton of weirdly named characters notwithstanding.

No, I think if this film wasn't MCU this thread wouldn't even be 5 pages by now and no-one on here would care if it were award-worthy. Maybe it really will be oscar-worthy. Or maybe it'll be like 99% of all other MCU movies: absolutely fine and make a ton of money which will be its own reward.

The only reason anyone is taking notice of this film at all is because of the Marvel banner.

Orient Express sure as hell wasn't.

He was asked a question and gave a very tame answer. Let's not turn this into another Scorcese fanboy tantrum.

A big score is a great way to make a small movie bigger. Zemeckis knew Back To The Future didn't have a large budget so made sure Silvestri made the music as huge as possible to compensate. (Not that this movie is 'small' by anyone's definition.)

It's precisely because I'm sick of superhero movies that I wish Cameron was back on the scene doing something new. Even so, if I liked something I think that excitement would be tempered if I knew I was getting a glut of it.

I know it's an old complaint but I really do wish Cameron was doing something new. I can't fathom how anyone, even fans of the first (such as they exist), can be giddy at the prospect of another four of these.