MovieChat Forums > MarkDaniels > Replies
MarkDaniels's Replies
Absolutely. Most of these people who just try to make it into a controversy is for nothing but publicity for the most part. I agree.
I don't mind feminism at all in Bond as long as it is not too carried away and done right. The Judi Dench example you brought up is perfect in this scenario. Judi Dench as M is one of the best casting choices EON has made when casted for Goldeneye and everyone loves her as M. So they could possibly handle this Lashana Lynch situation very well.
Yeah I'm glad we are on the same page. My anticipation for No Time to Die is extremely high with a bit of skepticism in regards to stuff we have discussed but overall I am very confident this film will live up and have very high hopes.
I love this film. It's one of my all time favorites. The first one is better but this is still on the same teir.
Casino Royale and Skyfall are considered to be two of the best Bond films and they are just great films in general. I became a James Bond fan because of the Craig films.
Exactly. Thats how I think it's going to play out. Bond will be a bit rusty in the beginning but not to the point where he just looks weak, and then as the film progresses, he'll be strong and back to his normal self as well as taking the spotlight from Nomi. Nomi will still probably be badass but she wont be a significant highlight as she was in the beginning. It'll focus more on Bond and making him look more awesome.
Yeah I understand how the line from Nomi is more of a toe-to-toe vibe like you said. I still expect that from her in the film, but only in the beginning because like I said, its only to give her character a little more charisma. If this aspect gets too carried away throughout the remainder of the film then yes, that will be a major issue. But I don't think it'll go that route. I feel like this whole feminism aspect that PWB supposedly propelled in the script is honestly more first act stuff, even with the inclusion of Ana de Armas in the Cuba sequence. Second and third act I doubt will include anymore of those themes.
I also agree that PWB's involvement was completely exaggerated in the headlines in regards to changing up characters as well as incorporating a huge feminism aspect in most of the film. Like you said, she's being included for script polishes such as character development and yes, to bring a little feminism into this film but not too much of it. I guarantee.
How? This one of the best movies ever made and personally my favorite comic book film ever.
Some aspects in the marketing does make it seem like the whole female empowerment will be a significant aspect in this film, especially from the "stay in your lane" line like you said. That definitely might be a controversial scenario if Nomi is the type of character who will mock Bond like that. However, I do expect it to be like that a little bit in the beginning of the film just to give her character a little more charisma since she is a new and much younger 00 agent. Also Bond has that witty arrogant and sassy like attitude anyways so probably that trait of his might provoke Nomi to say something like that to him in the film. Kinda similar to how he was like with Vesper in Casino Royale when he was like "you sign that. You represent the treasury" and Vesper just made him take another elevator by himself. So I could understand why Nomi would say something like that. However if she continues to act like that throughout the remainder of the film and making Bond look like a fool, it will very much take me out of the film. I don't think it will be the case because judging by the trailers, it looks like Bond will be the main highlight again instead of Nomi because he actually looks like he will take the lead in many of the other sequences in the film. Such as the shot in the second trailer where the two of them are heading into Safins bunker and Bond is in the lead with Nomi right behind him and following him. Like that tells me that Bond acts like the big leader throughout the rest of the film instead of Nomi.
Definitely the whole PWB inclusion may have something to do with that and I understand the big publicity about the first black female 00 agent. That being said, all of that could be executed terribly but if handled well and not overdone, it could come off very well and neccessary.
Therefore with all this female empowerment and Nomi being the new 007 in the beginning of the film I doubt will change the franchise as well as the character of James Bond.
I understand. I will definitely see this film opening night no matter what due to how much I love the MCU and the character of Black Widow but this film is honestly one of the least MCU flicks I'm excited for. The original cast of the Avengers will always hold a special place in my heart but its honestly time for the studio and fans to let some things go and move on with future characters. This film should've been released way back and it doesn't make too much sense for this film to be released now.
I also wouldn't say nearly all of these films to be excellent. The MCU has had a slew of weaker films like Captain Marvel, Ant-Man and the Wasp, Iron Man 2, Thor 2, and even Avengers 2 was pretty disappointing. I still think this film has a pretty good chance of being up there with the stronger MCU flicks because of the many great movies they had. To be honest though, I'm not even completely sold on the trailers for this film either. I dig the grounded spy-thriller concept but towards the end with all these CGI shots and the skydiving harkening back to typical comic book film formula just seriously took me out.
Like I said before, I understand all the anticipation surrounding this film and I am happy others are excited for it but its time for the fans and the studio to move on now.
I completely understand. However I only think the involvement of Lynch's character is just a story element. I highly doubt there will be future installments involving her character as well as this film trying to set up future installments. I think as the film progresses throughout its runtime, the less relevant her character will be in the film. She'll probably be quite relevant in the first act which will introduce us to her as the current 007 throughout Bonds retirement but once Bond goes back to Mi6 and possibly reclaims that title again in the middle of the film, Lynch will be nothing but an act of assistance to Bond on the field.
Definitely not. Try watching The Wolf of Wall Street on cable. The editing is extremely choppy on that film when aired on cable networks. The only network I can think of that actually doesnt censor anything is IFC.
Ha. I've never actually watched this film once on any cable network. I'll only watch this film when aired on television if it's on memberships like HBO, Cinemax, etc.
How is it a silent film? Nothing against silent films but this for sure isnt one and it's one of the best films ever made.
That's cool. I respect your opinion. But I honestly can't understand why he would be perceived as weird as well as his relationship with M. I don't really see anything weird about it. He just wanted revenge because of what she did to him in the past in regards to his espionage schemes that Mi6 never would approve on. I just don't really see how he is weird. He's intimidating, menacing, and had a strong motivation to get to her.
Yeah I completely agree.
Silva is one of the best Bond villains. I don't think he's weird at all. He does have a little bit of a creepy personality but isn't that what a villain is supposed to be like. Other than that he's menacing, intimidating, and has clear motivations.
The only homages this film really had was like you said the Komodo Dragon as being reminiscent to the alegators in Live and Let Die, but that wasn't even that cheesy compared to Live and Let Die. Bond stepping on the Komodo Dragon was just a small few second scenario. It wasnt a whole sequence like Live and Let Die. As for other homages, the only other one I really see is when they featured the DB5 as a homage to the previous films. There might be a few small homages here and there but they aren't really that predominant and are just seen as small visual elements. That's it. Anyways of course they would be feel obligated to include some throwbacks since Skyfall is 50th anniversary Bond film.
I actually think Goldeneye is a pretty decent Bond film. It has its flaws but I overall view it as pretty solid Bond film but I do agree that it gets a little too much praise than it deserves nowadays. I absolutely hated Tomorrow Never Dies, TWINE is ok, & Die Another Day is the worst Bond film ever in my opinion.
I completely agree with your take on Daniel Craig's Bond. The guys is pretty much the Bond we needed and the Bond that Ian Fleming actually envisioned. He was this dark, cold, and tough assassin while also having a bit of that cool guy charisma but definitely not as much as Moore or Brosnan, which I am very happy about. Daniel Craig is definitely my favorite Bond and on these boards, the guy just receives constant hate now.
Yeah I definitely think the main intention was to make the Craig films stand on its own and having nothing to do with the previous films as well as post Craig Bond films. It still makes sense though why fans would still consider Craig's Bond to you know, be considered as the same Bond pre Casino Royale. I completely get that since it was very much like that from Connery to Brosnan. Therefore, I can see why killing off Craigs Bond may face some backlash.
As for the Lynch scenario, I definitely think that she won't consume the mantel throughout the entire runtime and Bond will regain the 007 name somewhat in the middle of the film throughout the end.
Definitely. Like the guy is a cyber terrorist, he can gather sufficient Intel just like that and plan out all these hacks as soon as he can. That's what also makes him compelling villian. He definitely had to have alternatives as his process went along overtime.
Yes he had to have backup plans because it wouldn't make sense if he only stuck that one plan due to the specific characters involved in his scheme. Like I said, even without Bond he could've still get himself captured at Mi6. Bond didn't need Severine to tell him about the island. His current plan was to have Bond interrogate Patrice but Bond accidentally killed him unfortunately however it was fortunate enough for him to meet Severine to give him the intel.
Silva's motivation was completely different than the Jokers. The Joker was about anarchy and manipulating people into becoming a darker person of themselves by causing chaos and killing loved ones. Silva just wanted revenge and did everything he did just to get to M. In regards to the planned capturing scenario in both films, yes I will say that is the most similar aspect to The Dark Knight. But both wanted to get captured for different reasons.