Want to help support this channel? Check out my books on Amazon: www.amazon.com/Will-Jordan/e/B00BCO7SA8/ref=dp_byline_cont_pop_ebooks_1 Subscribe on Patreon: www.patreon.com/TheCriticalDrinker Subscribe on Subscribestar: www.subscribestar.com/the-critical-drinker
@yes it was a good day do you people get paid to spam the same links in the comments to almost *every* Drinker vid, or do you just have nothing else going on in your lives?
I love it in Goldeneye when M tells Bond "I think you're a sexist, misogynist dinosaur. A relic of the Cold War, whose boyish charms, though wasted on me, obviously appealed to that young woman I sent out to evaluate you." She doesn't like him at all but there's an acceptance that he's the best man for the job. He's flawed, and probably not the most likeable guy, certainly not when it comes to civilian life, but when the chips are down he's gonna kill a load of bad guys, save the world and get the girl, because that's what James f***ing Bond does. And that's the way we like him.
@@billr3053 That was in the 90s, though, plus Judy's M had some really good scenes one in which she reminisces about Bond and the scene always came as a slightly romantic. Watch Brosnan's Bond movies again. EDIT: Noice.
2 year after this movie and I have to say, the ending kinda caught me off guard. I was in sort of denial, still wanting to believe in that "he's fine, he's 007 he never dies" type of mentality from my childhood and seeing him *really* go hit me in the feels. It felt like Daniel was now off and gone along with the rest of the Bond franchise and possibly never to return. It felt like saying goodbye to all the other Bonds and their stories, I never realized how many memories I have growing up with the many bond movies.
I was relieved the humiliation was finally over. As long as he's alive he'll remain a straw man for insecure pop-culture contrarians. By the time they actually killed him off he wasn't Bond any more, he's a walking husk. The writers had contrived for him to fail everywhere, to built nothing, he had no life to go back to, nothing to live for, they took everything from him before they took his life.
I suppose, but Bond had terminal cancer with corresponding stades of severity with each movie with Craig, ending with stage 4 cancer with this last film and now he's dead. As cringe as the last two Brosnan movies were, that wasn't a reason to ditch all the good aspects that that era and all eras before brought. Goldeneye and Tomorrow were both excellent bonds, a lot of fun. Masterpieces of cinematography? Heck no, but neither were any of Craig's, though Casino was the tighestest in a long time. For me, Craig wasn't Bond, he was a man who called himself bond, played in a movie that might have been mistaken for a bond movie, but none of the core elements where there to enjoy them as a Bond movie. This post modern nihilism is really getting old.
I really enjoyed Craig's tenure as Bond, I like the cold nastiness he had about him. For me Casino Royale was brilliant and the best one he did. The only movie I didn't take to was Quantum of Solace. I was disappointed when Sam Mendes left the franchise because I felt he had a real feel for what Bond was. Pretty good review.
Honestly, I kind of enjoyed Quantum for that very same reason. It's not even really a Bond film, and having seen it a few times now, I don't expect it to be. And for me, at least, I think the forgettable villain thing is a bit overblown - it didn't help that the film was effectively two revenge plots slamming together, and as a result, both the A and B villain ended up getting roughly equivalent screen time. I think Greene could have been much more threatening had he been given more screen time, or at least a more direct connection to the scene of the agent being drowned in crude oil (assuming you could do that in the same breath as him using it to lead MI6 away from the real plot). For me, the real draw in Quantum is seeing Bond as what amounts to a state-sponsored serial killer, out for revenge against anyone and everyone with any connection to Vesper. It's not so much a spy film as it is an exercise in catharsis. I can understand the frustration of not getting a spy flick when you go to see a Bond film, but if you watch it the way you might watch a Korean revenge drama, I think it's quite compelling, actually.
I thought it was more bond like, a one off adventure trying to take down a guy doing evil shit, I think things really fell off a cliff in spectre.@@tripleoo0
Yes, because young women never go for older, tough, in shape, well dressed,rich, outspoken, charismatic world travelers with a hint of danger and mystery. That never happens. 😕
These are the guys, that never need to settle down. And most likely will never settle down. They can have basically a harem. But they need to be over 6 foot tall, too.
@@RobertLutece909 You kidding? I've worked with guys in their 50's who pull of the right amount of character and mystique and were constantly hooking up with 20 year old girls..
What I find amusing and comically ironic is that the people that says Bond is a relic from the past for seducing women is coming from the generation that created hook up culture and uses Tinder to meet people.
A female (and preferrably lesbian or at least bi) Bond could seduce people all over the place and no one would complain. At least that's what Legends of Tomorrow taught me.
Bond is an international British spy. I think outside of him being British why does it matter if he’s not white after being played by white actors for the past 60 years?
Within like 10 years maximum some people try to revert or eliminate acquaintance behavior of a whole species. Nice try. Sane people will still meet normally, despite what some "diverse" (not really diverse) people with certain frustrations want to make us believe. It's good to stay away from people with an unhealthy mindset.
I thought the Paloma character was a much needed breath of fresh air, when the movie was taking itself too seriously and becoming dreary and confrontational. Plus she was a real 'Bond Girl' type, well worth looking at! Apparently we have Phoebe Waller-Bridge to thank for that, otherwise Paloma would have been a one-line wonder.
The bit where Paloma starts kicking ass after saying she only had 3 weeks training actually is acknowledged in the script. Bond says "only 3 weeks training?" and she replies "more or less" and winks, implying the newbie thing was an act.
@@dasik84 I actually thought it was great characterisation and was a detail I really liked. It showed us she's not just good at kicking ass but also at being a spy and carrying a persona/narrative which is really driven home by the fact she fooled us as the audience as well as Bond. Slick.
Yeah I agree, surprised that point was completely missed. The quirky girl stereotype has grown old for most people, but having someone with a bit of personality who chugs down a drink immediately and then actually holds her own is just plain fun subversion. Regardless of gender or whatever.
Yeah I’m gonna go ahead and disagree, that is very lazy characterization. Literally only one line to try and save that dumb explanation, no spy agency would send someone by themselves who is unconfident within 3 weeks.
@@arnoldmunez5057 I think you may have missed my point. The film heavily implies she has actually had alot more than three weeks training and that she was pretending to lack confidence. The whole "green" thing was an act.
Totally agree with you when you say it feels like an end of an era. It’s a shame because I don’t know if we will see another Bond like this again. Daniel Craig has been a great Bond over the past 15 years or so. The old king is dead . Long live the king🤺
What is even is a "lane" for an international government-backed spy with a license to kill. He just does whatever mission is assigned to him, even when he gets kicked out of MI-6. You literally fire the guy and he keeps coming back, blowing up everything along the way.
It's such absurd dialogue from a British character as well. Stay in your lane is something that a middle-aged Floridian on a gun forum would say trying to sound tough and it was petulant when even they said it. It's a term from American Football. Such mediocre writing.
I've always said that the "problematic" aspects of Bond are the things that make him so bloody good at his job. He is a sociopathic cold blooded killer and doesn't really care who he fucks or fucks over to get the job done. He just does it with a fuck ton of style....
@john smith Let’s break down that comment: Bond is a womanizer who also is completely un-empathetic to a lot of people. Kind of a loner in some respects. Definition of anti-social behavior.
7:58 "And there's absolutely nothing in the script to reconcile these two events" Demonstrably untrue. When Paloma said she'd only trained for 3 weeks, and then suddenly was kicking ass, I took issue with that immediately. I said to myself "They better acknowledge that in some way". They did, moments later when Bond sees her skills he says "Three weeks training? Really?" She responds "More or less", which I interpreted as that she lied, and had a lot more training and experience than stated.
To be fair there is a script line that explains the 3-weeks of training received by Paloma. Bond says something like “Three weeks of training you say?”. And she says “more or less”.
Because we're supposed to say that Tinder is for women to hook up, not guys. Remember: it's empowering for women to sleep around, not men, according to the PC police.
@@KRYMauL Because prostitution is illegal in most parts of the U.S. and none of these cowards have the stones to actually do something about that. Modern faux-gressivism is all about expecting someone else to solve the problem. That's why I scoffed when all the ree-rees on Twitter talked about killing Trump after his election in 2016: I knew they all expected someone else to do it. Addendum: I'm not endorsing prostitution, I'm saying the people who talk about how empowering it is for women to sleep around (no comment on if it is) never publicly endorse legalizing prostitution, despite it being an empowering thing, according to their rationale.
One thing modern movie industry tends to forget that often the best Bond girls were much more than just sexualized prize objects. Resourceful and smart, they often brought to the table skills that allowed Bond to complete his mission (Holly Goodhead flying the shuttle, Ana Amasova being familiar with the Esprit submarine, Natalya - ha, ha - being tech savvy or Wai Lin being pretty much as capable as Bond himself). If you look in depth, you'll realize that the series isn't as misogynistic as it is often being portrayed to be.
People are crying wokeness so much over every film it makes me wonder if they want to go back to women in film being rape objects and very low on character.. They seem to never acknowledge older films being 'woke' by their own supposed standards.
The ending was so sad :'{ i am a teen who grwo up on bond series, thanks to my dad but This is the first movie I cried a tand I was certainly not the only one
It's the first bond film where I actually left the theatre depressed. How can a franchise go from a thrilling rollercoaster like Casino Royale to a dreary 3 hour marathon?
I'm glad I'm not the only one who thought so too. I didn't see it till now for my own reason but almost feels hollow. I really liked the first 10 minutes, a good strong opening that felt like a good continuation from Spectre. But the music choice of 'We Have All the Time in the World' and then Felix Leiter's arc made it clear what was going to happen later in the film and it was just like dominoes from then on. I'm an outlier in that I really enjoy all the other Craig films (including QoS) but something was just off here. There's some good moments and it's well shot but it's not enough to save it for me.
The goal is to demoralize. That's why modern "architecture" exists, why woke exists, why mass migration of blacks and muslims into white countries exists, why affirmative action and quotas exist, why weak justice systems exist. The goal of leftist politics is to drive the human spirit out of white people and make everyone dependent on politics/big government. It sounds crazy, but look around and tell me it's not true.
I felt the same and sadly it was the first time my daughter was old enough to go to the cinema to see a Bond film with me, thinking this would be a new tradition. I nearly walked out. It was so far removed in its tone for Bond film, dour, boring, woke, derivative, you name it. The fate of Felix Leiter, the fumbling around of Bonds replacement and the dour and unnecessary ending, it was all just insulting as a Bond fan.
My dad and I have watched the Bond movies together since I was a child. I remember going to watch Casino Royale in the theatres and my dad (who has watched every JB in theatres since Dr. No in '63) came out grinning. He said Craig was the best Bond since Connery and that he hasn't experienced Bond in that way since he was a child. As we both left the theatre after No Time To Die the first thing my dad said was, "well I'm pretty sure that's the last good Bond movie I'm ever going to see in my life."
@@leogavitt5419 I think the movie was bad because the villain was extremely weak. It wasn't really a good movie it was also extremely long and drawn out
Many plot holes and red herrings, but tonally, I think it was near perfect for Daniel Craig’s Bond. Very emotionally vulnerable as always but it was done convincingly and they also brought more levity than we’re used to seeing from him. And they wrapped it up great. Action sequences at beginning and end flawless. I enjoyed the whole film despite having trouble suspending disbelief about why the villain wanted to kill the world, etc. We got a modern James Bond Movie, but it was a REAL James Bond Movie. It’s the end of an era. Will we see good James Bond content again?
No G-Man ever retires, they get kidnapped and wake up in "The Village" and given a new number. Oh Bloody Hell, another number, why not just call me Jim!
In short: the bar was so damm low, we were so afraid that it was gonna be another last Jedi, that for the single fact that it was tolerable it was good
Interesting that you say that. It has a proper term I can’t remember and it’s even used in politics. The bar is set so low from absurdly controversial decisions that the public will be more willing to accept crap. It’s like being offered a rotten apple. Nobody wants it and there’ll be outrage over it. So they end up offering an apple that’s only slightly rotten and the public are more likely to settle. The original intention was never to force the public to eat the rotten apple. It was to ‘prepare’ and make them ‘more willing’ to accept something bad, but not quite as horrible.
@allgangstalkerswillburninhell MW3 was the game that finally killed my interest in the series. It feels like the industry committed to making lazy broken games to lower the bar so they can restart with lower expectations
I found this channel recently and very much enjoy the reviews! I wish RT certified critics were more like you and RedLettermedia as opposed to the people who give terrible films like Captain Marvel, Terminator: Dark Fate, Wonder Woman 1984, Birds of Prey, The Old Guard, Gunpowder Milkshake, Charlie's Angels (2019), and Ghostbusters (2016) positive reviews.
I’m also new to this channel, and I think it’s great! I completely agree with you too about Rotten Tomatoes and critics in general. However I do think that The Old Guard was pretty solid in my opinion! Birds of Prey was also not that bad either.
Bit of a correction: the CIA didn't betray bond. The one CIA agent - the one who betrays Bond - is bad. This shouldn't be much of a spoiler, as you mention the betrayal, anyway, and the second that it occurs, it's obvious that he's a bad/rogue agent. Anyway, great review as always.
Honestly, I don't want any more Bond movies. The whole Seductive Spy thing was just one part of what made James Bond fun. Bond could blend into a crowd, pick up a quick disguise to infiltrate wherever he needed to be, and smoothtalk his way into groups. He wasn't just a stuntman with a penis he liked to use. He was a SPY in a mildly fantastical world. And people nowadays have no idea what that entails.
You know what, Casino Royale retained that "SPY" essence in it, hence it was so well received, but then me too happened, and punted the character to oblivion.
Just like Hercule Poirot, James Bond is that type of character you don't need to retire, because you can write an endless amount of advantures for him. I don't know why they had to come up with this idea that he's suddenly old and it's over.
I was expecting the worst when I saw this movie, but it ended up being a good film for me. Rather than getting walked all over by a new 'modern audiences' character I think they actually end up having a good deal of respect for each other, and she does the right thing and an unusually respectful and honourable thing (for a female character) in asking Bond to be reinstated as the Legendary 007.
I liked Craig as Bond but other than his first appearance as Bond, none of the movies that followed were any good. It's time they let the Bond franchise die, but they will not and will grind it into the ground for what ever $ they can get from it. No Time To Die was the best Bond since Casino Royale, but still not a great Bond movie. I really thought Casino Royale indicated a new direction for Bond, more gritty and realistic, but it was not to be.
I just finished watching the movie and as I was leaving the theater there were two elderly men who watched it also were standing outside. One of these elderly gentlemen said to the other “So- we have no more heroes”. I found that statement to be really sad.
Yes all tough masculine male heroes... especially white men are being erased, replaced or having their personalities modified due to WOKE agendas. Also combine the unrealistic movie scenes where they show women being equally as strong or stronger than men... it's like watching a scene where they try making you believe a house cat can run at the same speeds of a cheetah. Just be glad (this time) Hollywood didn't turn Bond into some gay or transgender person.
My favourite Bond is Pierce Brosnan. If the special effects and technology of today existed at Sean Connery’s time, he would be unbeatable, but unfortunately they didn’t and that takes a bit of the fun out - although my favourite Bond movie is "You only live twice". The first one from Pierce wasn’t good, then he found his way. And the combination with the effects was great. Pity he didn’t last long.
It wasn’t perfect, and there were issues you could clearly point out during the movie, but when it all wrapped up it made sense to me. The dynamic between the “old” and the “new” 007 seemed realistic, where there would be a power struggle between a seasoned veteran and a spry, talented, but inexperienced agent. Both trying to prove themselves but ultimately giving proper respects to the OG. It was long-winded, but there was a lot to unpack from the last movie, and also a lot to tie up from this movie. I think it was great at trying to tell us that change is coming, but the OGs will still be respected. I think the movie was damn good, and the ending kinda killed me in a pretty heartfelt way.
If the kind of changes that I expect are coming, then I don't want to watch another bond movie ever! Roll on James bond the black disabled transgender guy!
I am always amazed at how much is being communicated when the Drinker utters, “go away now.” Same words every time but a massive spectrum of different meanings.
This time, he sounded sad. Like Bond will never be able to rise even close to its classic heights because of agenda-focused writing over character or plot driven writing. We long for those, but they're becoming a rarity anymore. Every fucking film has to "make a statement" or "send a message." No. No it doesn't. Some should, Bond shouldn't.
Yes I guess I'll go to cinema because the drinker said film is ok - I'm not kidding. I don't trust other reviewers anymore, and if the stuff from trailers would be in movie I would not give them my money and that is is. Still trailers leave bad taste in mouth.... so I'm struggling.
Agreed. At this point the people that make content based around these woke movies are way more entertaining than the movies themselves, and that's a FACT!
Same. I forgot this movie even existed let alone officially dropped in theaters. Was too busy waiting to be disappointed by how they pozzed Many Saints of Newark instead
My reasons why only Connery Moore and Brosnan portrayed James Bond..... If I watch an action movie I'll switch on the tv and see where it takes me with no expectations If I watch a Bourne movie I want to see top notch fighting scenes, a driven and ultra serious character with no time for women in his life doing all he can to put the pieces together in the puzzle If I watch a Bond movie (the iconic gentleman spy) I want to see all the CORE ELEMENTS that made him ICONIC, a playboy spy with lots of women, outrageous villains, charisma, charm, suave sophistication, fun with cheese and 1 liners, getting the girls and saving the world, ESCAPISM Only the 3 above had all those core elements All I want is for Bond to be Bond, just like I want characters like Bourne to be their character
Western society has become like that A+ student who was doing well who suddenly and for no inexplicable reason is now wasted on drugs and the student insists it's not drugs.
@@JD-lp5rw I wouldn't blame Gen Z. Most of the crazier stuff has come from academia, Hollywood, politicians, and activists from any of the above, so Gen Z isn't really influencing anything; most of them are high schoolers or younger.
I think that was back in '05 or later. Whenever Daniel Craig's first movie was. Same thing went for a link with brown hair. Crazy how nuts everything got in 6 or so years. More change in 6 years than about 30 years before it.
I thought Daniel Craig did a decent job as Bond, mostly in “Casino Royale” and “Skyfall.” The gritty seriousness he brings to the role works but isn’t well-rounded because he doesn’t pull off seduction and banter well, which is a core aspect of the Bond character. Connery and Moore were actually a good deal smoother with the ladies.
There's a bit in Futurama where a new 'edgy' character takes Calculon's place after his death. The thing is, Calculon and the new actor are bad in opposite ways, but they were both praised heavily during their time in the spotlight. The new 'edgy' guy isn't even trying to act, barely showing any emotion at all. But, he's praised as being edgy and deep because the super-smart modern viewers see apathy as a virtue. But, the 'stupid' people like Fry absolutely adore Calculon and want him back. More importantly, they hate the new guy who doesn't understand the appeal of the cheesy All My Circuits soap opera. They basically traded their old fans for the 'smart' new fans who never cared about the show. Problem is... Calculon becomes an apathetic actor just like the new guy and gets praised for it. So, the themes of the episode are a bit muddy. Still, great metaphor for Daniel Craig-era vs. Sean Connery-era.
Connery was, imho, the only Bond who felt like a charming gentleman who happened to also be a ruthless, cold-hearted killer when neccessary. You could really feel the danger that he could exude when he had a "friendly" chat with a villain. Dalton and Craig certainly felt just as dangerous, but didn't have the charm, Brosnan and Moore were just as charming, but didn't feel dangerous at all. That's not to say that I disliked any of those actors' performances as Bond, they all brought something unique to the table. It's just very difficult to hit all of those notes at once, it seems.
Bond was killed with Daniel Craig, not now. He was a charismatic, insolent womanizer and with Daniel Craig they turned him into a pre-amnesia Jason Bourne. Pierce Brosnan was by far the best Bond.
FINALLY saw this tonight. When it hit theaters I was too busy. Caught a VERY subtle nod to Casino Royale. When Rami Malek first visits Madeline in her office, he points out a Foxglove in her office. Kind of pinkish, purplish flower, very common in Europe, and invasive in parts of the US. Foxglove is of the genus Digitalis, which is the poison that Le Chiffre tried to kill Bond with at Casino Royale. Neither film ties Digitalis and Foxglove together. Tough one to catch, but for Botany/Flower nerds.
Crazy idea here: instead of trying to "modernize" the James Bond franchise, just set the next film in 1960 at the height of the Cold War. All the "problematic" aspects of the character wouldn't be; people love Mad Men, right? Go back to the roots of the franchise.
I'd do it as a show set late 50s at the start, expand on the spy aspect, the travel aspect, casinos, cars, drinking, fighting etc. just the bond doing bond. amazon series, going through each novel plot. Mad Men, I can't remember the last time anyone talked about that, ended 6 years ago.
That's exactly the route Guy Ritchie went when he resurrected THE MAN FROM UNCLE in 2015 - rather than try to retrofit it into the 21s century, he set the movie in the early 60s, when it was conceived. And it worked, too, even if indifferent marketing and release timing kept it from making back its marketing budget.
I read that when he said he'd rather slit his wrists, he'd literally just finished filming Spectre and was quite frankly, knackered. He later apologised and said that it was a bad choice of words as that particular movie was very demanding.
@@dpesposito 🤣 his career would have been fine and after 4 Bond films and other successful ones, he has plenty of millions of pounds (not dollars he’s english duh)
@@HUDSON7 Saying the things he did would lower his chances of being considered for other films. Retracting those statements simply shows he's predictable and can be the cog in the machine they need him to be. And, no one cares about the english thing. sorry mate
I'm sure Daniel Craig didn't need the money. He is getting paid over 100 million to do the next Knives Out trilogy for Netflix. He is not required to do any crazy stunt and he said he had so much fun doing the last Knives out and Logan Lucky. He probably enjoys doing those comedic films.
Another reviewer suggested that writing the next movie as a period piece (following the books very closely) might be a way to shake off this legacy and start fresh (from a certain point of view). Personally I find the idea appealing, if it's done by real writers of course.
It wouldn't be a bad idea at all and would help add some fun back into the series, but like you said you'd have to get some good writers and try to break free of the modern 'Message'.
I was thinking that, if they keep making these films in the present era, the ip will lose its identity and become little more than a British Jason Bourne or Mission Impossible
I liked it for the most part. (Not to sure about the nano-bots; or Blofeld's "bionic-eye". No one in MI6 noticed he had one for the 5 years he was in prison?). Yes, it was 3hrs long but it brought the Daniel Craig era to a close and pretty much wrapped up all the plot/storyline lines. It did say "James Bond Will Return" at the very end of the credits, so I suppose we're in for another reboot. BOND is straight out of the post WW2 cold war era, so is it still relevant? Can a reboot make it so? Will we have an austerity Bond?
Bond's womanising is problematic? How many world saving missions did he complete EXACTLY BECAUSE he womanised the women he should?? I'll tell you: in ALL of the movies
I heard people want Bond to be replace by a gay guy, so instead of Bond trying to seduced women he going to seduced men. Like how many percent of the world is gay? like a very small percent. So he going to fail alot more often then successed, so it won't make sense.
I just watched GoldenEye a month ago. It's like having a spoonful of Honey after starving for 5 months. It's just so sweet and you appreciate it so much.
Goldeneye was pretty amazing. The other Pierce Bond movies were hit or miss, sadly. And other than the facial scar and the constant chain-smoking he actually looked a lot more like James Bond than other men who played the role.
Yeah, personally I hate how Craig has portrayed Bond. Probably due to the management to 'make it China friendly'. He actually plays a far better James Bond co-starring in Tombraider as the rival raider to Lara Croft. There he played the personality of James Bond far better with jokes and fun. In the real James Bond he's.... dumb. The last JB I've seen is Skyfall and I remember the reveal of Silva as the double 0 before Bond. The vacant expression of Craig as if there was no light burning upstairs made him look dumb and stupid; no where near the James Bond of earlier actors with their glib and witty British jokes. While it was a fun movie; that's when I stopped watching JB, even though I was a huge fan until Pierce Brosnan hung up the license to kill.
My favorite part of the movie was when the credits were done, they did indeed include the classic "James Bond will return." I was scared shitless that It was going to say "007 will return." I'm probably reading too much into it, but it gave me some hope.
@@fonkyman SPOILERS.......,....... I still don't get this film at all!!! It's called James Bond.lol Why without a bond, a strong, intelligent BRITISH MALE who is loyal to queen and country the franchise is worthless to me. The lack of imagination is what gets me..There are many OOs do a spin-off if you must ..to keep the idiot feminists happy but why kill all the male characters?????I had my doubts about Q because he was so young but making him gay was a deliberate choice.ridiculous.
My idea for all it’s worth, is to cast Henry Cavill and set it back in the 1960’s during the Cold War. Have him do actual spy s**t, and have the main villain be Red Grant. Where he is a mirror opposite of bond, but a version of himself that’s become more violent and ruthless.
RIP James Bond! Bad way to go out but what a legacy to leave behind. There were a lot of good movies over the years that will live on infamy. What a legend!
Just got the flik for my birthday and I have to say.... This is the closest in tone (several music cues taken from it to confirm it... Including an excellent slow version of the main theme) to my favourite Bond flik OHMSS.... And as a lifelong Bond fan I would put it at number 3 (certainly my favourite of Craig's fliks) but I left it wanting, even as an, aforementioned Bond fan, that they end the series here... ... The beautifully done final scenes really leave the movie character of James Bond nowhere to go... If they reboot it with a younger actor, Where's the suspense going to come from because you know in the future that the James Bond character will meet that definitive fate... The only way the series could go on was by focusing on the number 007 (as its frequently stated it's just a number and doesn't retire when the agent retires etc) but I think personally it would be a mistake
That’s not how he dies? The virus is also not unspecified (explained in great detail even) or from an unnamed origin. You very very obviously didn’t watch the movie because this is just blatantly wrong
Fukanaga's comments on classic Bond disappointed me a fair bit. I appreciate he's not a realistic role model for young men, but he was never fking meant to be. It's like calling superman's x-ray vision problematic, it's rediculous.
@kevin barker By realistic role model, I mean someone who models a life achievable in reality for at least one other person. Fantastical or not, a role model needn't _literally_ model someone's ideal life, anway, just their ideal ethos.
@@Hoganply You can bet your ass there have been some incredible secret agents, and most likely still exist. Though the cold war era was the pinnacle of that. Bond was also great role model as he was heroic, saved the humanity for god knows how many times. And it's not like he was violent if he didn't have to. Thus he tried to achieve things without violence. That is perfect archetype masculine hero in my books. But even if the wasn't, that shouldn't matter one bit. Bond certainly isn't corrupting the youth and I would much rather have my children watch all the bond films than 90% of the current pop and hip hop stars for example.
I would disagree 100% with your assertion that Bond wasn't a realistic role model for young men. When you really look at Bond, what were his basic characteristics? He was strong, capable, educated, well-spoken, well-dressed, polite, refined, and yet still able to fight when fighting was called for. He used his brain as much as, or more than, his brawn. And because of all that, he rose to the top of his profession. What part of that isn't a good role-model for young men? Sure, if you only take a surface glance, someone could argue that young men can't become super-spies or there's no such thing as "her majesty's secret service", but that's just the fancy paint job and ignores the real nuts and bolts. Any guy, young or old, who trains as James trains will become a much better version of themselves. If they study etiquette, for example, and learn to dress themselves in fitted suits, they'll be able to accomplish far more than if they go around town in ripped up jeans and t-shirts, farting at every turn. They might never get into a car chase through an old Italian village, but learning how to drive defensively certainly will pay dividends as they navigate life in general.
@Raylan Givens What was Atticus Finch if not educated, refined, well-dressed, capable and every bit as much of a Bond as 007 himself? Slight differences, sure, but both are fictional characters who are fighting for truth and justice in their own ways, against their own particular set of enemies. And I would also point out that your post exemplifies exactly the lack of education that we spoke of above. You've come up with an either-or argument that puts all the blame on anyone who doesn't agree with you and doubled down on that by suggesting that the Bond stories can only be one very particular thing.
Rami was also hardly not in the film at all, he could have literally been in the last 10 minutes of the film and had the same impact. It’s so sad because he’s such an amazing actor. I wonder if he did have more of a role but it was cut?
I was actually looking forward to him as the villian because of how good he is.. then i started seeing reviews calling the villian lackluster. So disappointed.
I think he was being planned to be the quiet, reserved but threatening villain, except he's just not. Like, he still had many scenes like in the garden with Matilde or when he comes face to face with Bond, even his death epilogue was flat so it's not really the editor's fault. To me, he's a very expressive actor and does it very very well, but he's not Mads Mikkelsen or Tony Leung who can act with their eyes alone. I'd say it's either him not "owning" the character or the director's forcing it on him.
after seeing a few seconds of his performance i thought it was cartoonish, i don’t know if it’s his fault or just the script and production, but something was off, thinking about it, all bond villains somewhat suck, i’ve yet to see a bond villain like homelander from the boys, which is actually intimidating and scary, a real threat.
I like the film overall, the ending was shocking and effective in the moment but in the long run, it's going to make the next film very weird. I don't mind that they made Bond more vulnerable because that's what made Casino Royale such a good film. It's why Craig's Bond has stood out for me. But the chemistry Bond has with Madeline is nowhere near the same as Vesper. That storyline is basically what the entire Craig era has revolved around (alongside the childhood trauma Blofeld stuff)
I think Kingsman is doing a good job of carrying on the legacy so much so that I'd rather order, "A martini with Gin not Vodka, and for you to stir it while looking over at an unopened bottle of Vermouth."
I wasn't a fan of him instantly seducing a widow after killing her husband, that shit was creepy as fuck, i think it would be better if he had to work for it or got rejected sometimes
@@yousuckatcod by today's standards..yes 100 mil is kind of meh for big IPs like this. If it was a smaller or lesser known flick sure but 100 mil is chump change to things like disney movies or even other grossing movies of the 21st century
SJW writters: We need more strong female bond characters that can lead the franchise like Nomi. Honey Ryder: Carried a knife to defend herself, swore vengeance apon anyone who wronged her, and always kept her femininity and sexiness. Anya Amasova: Was assertive and tough, yet feminine and sexy. She was also familiar with The Espirit, Pointed a gun at Bond, defended herself, and was her closet to fight Drax. Holly Goodhead: Kicks 3 men's ass, was very smart and resourceful, was good with shuttles and spaceships, drove The Moonraker, and always kept her femininity and sexiness. Natalya Simonova: Kicked the shit outta Boris, was tech-savy, and was close to killing Xenia. Let's not forget Jinx, Xenia, Mary, Melina, Tracy, Pussy, Octopussy, Pam, and much more.
I wonder if the WOKESHITE-CUT will ever be 'leaked" so we can see just what a croc of shite they were trying to turn the franchise into. I'm sure you'd hear the fans shrieking globally.
The funny part is that anyone thinks the Hollywood decision makers and "me too creators" have any real agenda aside from pushing their own success. The money -men- ,ah, _persons_ just want money and invest in whoever seems to know what they're talking about how to milk it from the public. And being the hopelessly out of touch vampires the they are just back the latest fad linked to whatever is trending. KK over at Lucasfilm has only ever been as liberal as helped her get what she wants. As a narcissist she may not be able to tell the difference but actual liberals over the age of 13 always could.
@CEO of Secularism This. Was going to say that the ending of the movie doesn't even make that much sense... just lazy way of ending it... Couldv'e been an ongoing thing with the new Bond over the next few movies... similar to Bond and Blofield back in the day. What a shame...
I watched Casino Royale in 2006 with someone very dear to me. We hadn’t spoken to each other in 10 years. She passed away at the end of last year. The part where he visits Vespers grave to mourn her and to finally let her go was probably one of the most difficult scenes I’ve ever experienced in film.
Stay strong man. I haven’t been in your exact situation before but I’ve felt a little bit of that pain. We’re all gonna take that step eventually. For all we know, you might even look back on this one day and even I might already be gone. I know it hurts losing somebody close to you but there is no gift more valuable that anybody in the world could ever give to you than to carry on your memory even when your gone. I always think about that. What would have to happen for me to truly be able to pass away happily? And the only answer I can really think of is the knowledge that I at least touched somebody’s life in the world in such a way that there is at least one person still somewhere out there learning from and maybe even celebrating the unique lessons and personality that I brought into the world for however long I was here. So carry her memory with you, in your words and in your actions. We can all only hope to be so lucky to be missed in such a way.
@@WhirlingMusic Yeah well It was a traumatic experience out of our control that doomed the 5 yr relationship. Hearing out of the blue 10 yrs later she took her own life opened up a few things. I wouldn’t have expected her to think of me, we had our own lives and families.
Couldn’t agree more ~ liked it more than I expected and even thought the ending was pretty poignant to a degree. Having only seen your review of the trailer I fully expected to hate Nomi too but no, she was fine and I wouldn’t mind seeing her in the following films tbh. Downsides? Far too long and for god sake, make Lea Seymoux more than just a plot device - she is the best thing to happen to Bond in years. Also, someone give Ana de Armas a decent leading role - she lit up the screen in her short time here (although yeah, her part was stupidly written). Also, could they not have done something better with Naomie Harris? I felt they’d been telegraphing for years she was going to be more prominent but no, just there to answer the phone. At least the scorched earth finale means they have a blank sheet of paper now - don’t fuck it up!
Yeah, except "bots" on that level are biological/chemical "machines" that work like cells and enzymes. Electronic robots require far too many moving parts to function on that small of a level. Although realistically, the nanobots won't be able to last in your body indefinitely and will eventually denature. So it's 100% possible to simply wait it out, but that's not cool.
@@Burner.Account.. A secret agent of her majesty's secret service consumed nanobots, this is what happened to his organs. JB, 🖕 presenting to the emergency room 🖕 with iminent death appears to suffer from Hyperartificialisemia, hyper meaning high, artificialis meaning artificial and emia meaning presence in blood, high presence of artificial in blood.
Ironic with the title, all this time waiting…just to see 007 get the royal-less treatment. Glad Ian Flemming did not have to witness this butchery. Manly tears have been shed
Haven't seen this movie yet, so this is a general comment. Do you honestly believe that if Ian Fleming was alive and writing Bond now, in the 2020s as opposed to the 1950s that he would write the character exactly the same? Really.
100% agree with this. I think the technical aspects and production values are some of the most impressive of any Bond film but it feels like a confused mish mash, as if it's at odds with itself. By and large it comes out unscathed but it promises a lot more than it gives, weren't it not for some unfocused storytelling and characterisation. If they are to make a new Bond the producers need to realise what makes them so successful and not try to put any agenda on them. If that is their intention I'll accept this as the final one.
This wasn't a Bond film,this was a Metal Gear Solid film. Soooo much was pilfered,from Foxdie to nanomachines,smart blood to Q being Otacon,the stairs level,M being the Colonel,the main female character hiding a secret about who she is related to,the facility being bombed with the hero in it,the antagonist who speaks in reams and dies rather easily,Blofeld(Darpa chief) being killed early on,hell they even had a Codec heavy mission. Not complaining tho :D
The moment I saw Daniel heavily advocating for a female James Bond and saying James Bond is a thing of the past because of how he sees women, knew James Bond was pretty much dead.
They also copped the mobile team of agents coordinating their actions in the field from Mission Impossible. I like Bourne, and I like the Mission Impossible series (much better than this iteration of Bond in fact), but I don't want Bond to be either of those. I want Bond to be Bond.
Casino Royale was the last great Bond movie (and arguably one of the best). After that it became a crap fest and went to generic action movie status. Even skyfall fell underneath many cliches and didn’t really feel like a bond movie. They really took themselves too seriously on this one.
Yeah, but it wasn't just Bourne. As Craig himself said at the time, the Austin Powers movies had completed the devolution of Bond into a caricature. There was a general feeling after the over-the-top DIE ANOTHER DAY (invisible car!) that the franchise had to shift gears to something grittier if it was going to be viable in the 21st century. Of course, we can debate whether the Craig films chose the right way to go about that.
Agree with everything noted, the films ending was a colossal kick in the nuts that also successfully hit the emotional note it aimed for. However, can't help but feel it was shocking for shocking sake and the producers have made life very hard for themselves and whoever replaces Craig is in the unenviable position of not only replacing Craig but being the next films own newly designated Bond in the storyline that all the other characters have to respond to as Bond, just how will they do that? It will inevitability be another reboot but can't help but feel the producers are going to double down on the new 'Bond for the me too generation' approach and the quality and believability of the character will suffer as a result. As I left the screening I thought that the producers either wanted a real challenge of a complete reboot or subconsciously wanted to destroy their own product in a mad fit of career suicide. The careful choice of who the next actor will be and how they will shoe-horn him (/her) into being Bond will be quite a display of storytelling. The film seemed to want to subvert our expectations of what a typical Bond film is which is a admirable choice but only if it exceeds expectations in a positive way. The choice they have now is will they go with an actor everyone can see as Bond with high odds like Tom Hardy or in respect to their approach with this film, cast an unknown or at least an actor few had considered which is what I expect they will do. I think Nicholas Holt would be a sound choice in this view but we will see. What I would like to know is who people think would be an obvious choice and who would be less obvious but still feasible choice? Additionally, what is their: * Favorite Bond film *Least favorite Bond film *What they consider the most underrated Bond film call it...
Bond became an iconic alpha male character, because Connery was an alpha male. All he had to do was walk into a room to instantly command the entire space, and he never lost that charisma even in his last years. I've loved him in every role he's played because he always comes of as tough, capable, reliable and manly.
Taking out the womanizing also undoes a core concept of the Bond character; that he's unable to form a meaningful relationship with anybody. The whole point is that the guy lives on a razor's edge and death is always around the corner. Bond's lifestyle never gave him the opportunity, and hence he doesn't have the ability, to connect with anyone. With women, sex is all that he has. Which is great on a surface-level, but since "On Her Majesty's Secret Service", it's always been an underlying notion that at the end of the day, Bond is going to be alone. (The books actually address this by sometimes telling the reader what happens to the Bond Girls in-between the stories; Bond finds them all too clingy and finds someone better-suited for them. Which, in turn, makes Bond sound pathetic as opposed to badass). People who watch Bond movies and want to be everything like him miss the reality that James Bond is a broken, empty man who only has his work. The expensive suits, fast cars, and one-liners are just the facade--because there IS no actual "James Bond" under there anymore.
Great video. It’s a shame what they’ve done to this franchise… shameful ! The saddest part is that Barbra Brocoli was an accomplice and her father and Ian Fleming must be rolling over in their God damn graves. Shameful!
It was a great movie, this video is just someone grasping at straws, straws he knows his followers will follow without question. I can see pandering when is present, Ms. Marvel, The Star Wars sequels, etc.. This film was a proper send off for Daniel Craig's time for James bond..Ana de Armas was amazing in her small role and her act should've been detected by.. You and the drinker. But we live in an era where is things don't go exactly as we have in mind it's a disaster.. Hyper sensitivity, disguised under rational thought.
To be honest, considering how “problematic” a character like Bond is to current Hollywood thinking, a mixed bag was probably the best we could have hoped for. It’s a really sad state of affairs that, these days, we walk out of a film from a long-standing franchise and are relieved that it wasn’t a _complete_ dumpster fire.
One can only imagine what the original version was like before the reshoots - I'm guessing Bond spent the whole movie being 'humbled' by diverse women and then killed. Hollywood being subtle as usual
It's pretty ridiculous and hypocritical. If you have a man-eater female character being flirty with all the men, it's okay. But James Bond in the modern era? Oh no can't have that. But Hollywood has always been full of shit. They froth at the mouth over Trump while shrugging/ignoring the pervs and pedos in their own ranks. Besides, sometimes Bond's womanizing was a bit too ridiculous. Sometimes felt like a Western harem-anime lol.
Sturgeon's Law overrides this. Movies have been shuyte long before this pandering and they'll be shuyte not much longer after (until theaters consolidate and shut down due to streaming). Diversity is just this generation's version of shakycam.
I think that if they really had made an "oldschool" Bond movie with all the problematic elements left in, it would've been even more of a dumpster fire than you would expect. There's a reason why the earlier movies in the series are pretty unwatchable and cringey these days. It's a bit like watching someone make out with the skeletons in their closet. There are just too many things about Bond movies that should not be glorified. Heck, even the damn cocktail he drinks should never have been glorified. Vodka martinis are stirred cocktail. Shaking it makes the ice melt into the drink faster, watering it down and making it flavorless. And because of the shaken cocktail trend, people responded by making martinis drier and drier until they were something like 8:1 ratios of vodka/gin to vermouth when they used to be a sensible 1:1 ratio. But flavorless, watered-down cocktails didn't matter to drinkers of that era, because the marketing campaigns sought to portray vodka as the sleek, "sophisticated" liquor for day-drinkers that supposedly didn't leave the smell of alcohol on your breath. This marketing campaign did so much damage to the cocktail and liquor industry that it actually ruined the whiskey industry for DECADES. Most of the whiskey distillery closures in the past century happened in the 70s and 80s due to this. That goes for Scotland as well. The blending trends of whiskey around that era were also borderline criminal. Most people alive today don't remember the days of "light whiskey, the whiskey that drinks like a vodka" but it happened and it was terrible. Thanks, James Bond. You managed to ruin masculinity, consent, AND alcohol.
Yeah, I was distracted trying to do the math on that. During the current timeline of the film he looked like he was in his mid-30's at worst, which meant he would have been a teenager during the opening scene.
I could never accept Craig as Bond it was as the narrator said just Bourne movies with a different actor . They changed Bond from the privately educated , middle class charmer witha dark side to a bouncer who joined the forces and some how worked his way up the ladder. I went to see CR and walked out half way through I was sitting there thinking "where's Bond" in the hope that it would be revealed that Craig was an imposter pretending to be Bond . The line that killed Craig as Bond for me was when the bar man asked if he wanted his martini shaken or stirred and he replied "do look like I care " a remark normally made from a bully in nightclub .
I agree with everything you said in this review. I thought it had some very "Bond" type sequences but I feel like a lot of it was rushed. I also feel like it did a good job working with what it had and I like that they didn't shit on James like I was worried it would. I enjoyed that they gave flaws to the newest 007 and eventually made her act how anyone would act towards Bond once you got to know him. All that said I don't agree with killing Bond and never will so I won't be watching any Bond movies that don't have James in them.
Agreed. The whole plot of Skyfall was about Bond being too old and worn out to remain an agent. They can't do that plot then make two more movies. Plus, Craig obviously hates the role and Spectre was the most boring Bond movie ever so it would have been much better had they just rebooted the series after Skyfall and started fresh with another actor.
Also, if you’re referring to the clip in the video, he’s doing it correctly: rounding a corner in close quarters, you want to have it over or under your shoulder so you can compress the weapon as much as possible, so you don’t have the muzzle sticking out as you punch out from corners. People new to clearing buildings often times have the barrel stick out way before they themselves cross the threshold of a doorway or corner, and the best place to be is right on the other side of the wall to grab the barrel. In all the other clips, they’re using stocks just fine. If you’ll notice, bond pushes out and shoulders it once he rounds the corner, which is exactly what you want to do to gain stability once you cross the most dangerous part of the room or hallway. I haven’t seen the full movie, but for the most part, they’re doing a decent job in clips.
@@Savnoc Exactly. IRL 007 wouldn't even be British. The "agent" would most likely be a foreign national working somewhere like a belligerent nations embassy, military establishment or corporation. Bond would actually be the Covert Human Intelligence recruiter/handler, and would never even have completed an advanced driving course, let alone weapons handling etc. A lot of the military and security carers depicted by Hollywood are usually far more mundane and low risk IRL.
If Tom Hardy or Henry Cavill are cast as Bond, and he is portrayed as ultra confident, cocky and ruthless, every woman I know will be falling over themselves to see it, despite the media constantly telling them what they should want. We need to see more men portrayed the way George Peppard played Hannibal Smith in The A-team, i.e. a man who will laugh in someone's face when they point a loaded gun at his.
