What are you watching & why? (splain)

duramax

Knifemaker / Craftsman / Service Provider
Joined
Nov 29, 2012
Messages
4,971
So,, I OO7 pre movie prepped and watched Spectre. Went to the movies last night and saw the new OO7. We really liked it , like a lot ! I felt it really tied into Spectre well and had a lot of little OO7 past movie history items and scenes. For me a worth see :) !!! First time in awhile the theatre was full ! Was really nice to hear the crowd responses throughout the movie :)
 

The Amazing Virginian

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2010
Messages
8,347
I saw the new 007 movie today, No Time to Die, and it is bad.

Very long and rambling, story doesn’t make a lot of sense, almost zero secret gadgets, very few femme fatales (Ana de Armas is a sexy babe, but she has a tiny cameo), very short on action sequences, huge disappointment.

I kind of liked Daniel Craig’s James Bond in the prior movies, but this movie just sucks as a movie. Boring, uninteresting, and ultimately I didn’t care what happened to any of the characters.

We saw it in a giant IMAX theater last night, and I could not disagree more strongly with your opinion of it.

I am guessing the difference is almost entirely in one's expectations. In fact, calling a movie a disappointment is entirely based on one's expectations.

It is very different than pretty much all previous Bond movies in several ways. But there were also lots of little tributes to past Bond movies. They even gave us martinis that were shaken, not stirred. However . . .

"Almost zero gadgets" . . . totally disagree. Maybe more gadgets than any of the Daniel Craig Bond movies, which did have "almost zero" in his first two Bond movies. A gadget folding glider / submersible. A couple of different cool gadget explosive devices. Two gadget cars, including the beloved Aston Martin DB5 loaded with gadgets (four Aston Martins in total appear in the film). Implanted tracking devices. It even had a frigging gadget watch! Which Q specifically told Bond in "Skyfall" was the kind of thing that they don't go in for anymore. Almost zero gadgets? I say not.

Very short on action sequences? Again, I totally disagree. I bet Bond shoots, chokes, smashes and/or blows up more bad guys in this movie that in any other. Too many car, helicopter and motorcycle chase scenes, and too many shootouts, for me to count. The Havana shootout scene alone was terrific for action. Boats blown up. Cars blown up. Islands blown up. TONS of action.

"Very few femme fatales" . . . absolutely true! He isn't banging random chicks here - just one, his love and his partner. That might be a problem for some - not for me. I think fans of Bond had better get used to it, too, because the 1960s "Goldfinger" days of a womaning Bond slapping women on the butt are probably gone forever in the #MeTo 2020s.

Long? Also True. I'm guessing the longest Bond movie ever. But I did not find anything about the movie rambling. I never thought it dragged. I thought it was very well directed and edited. So who cares if it is long, as long as it's all entertaining?

And it made about as much sense as any other Bond movie . . . which as usual is not a whole lot. Realistic and rational plots has never been a feature of Bond movies. They have always required a certain suspension of disbelief, and I think this one requires no more or no less than they all do. I fact, I would say that the plot makes more sense than the majority of Bond movies, even some beloved ones like "Casino Royale," "Goldfinger," "From Russia With Love," and "Skyfall."

I enjoyed it! But, to be fair, there has never been a Bond movie which I haven't enjoyed. I would rank it in the top half, maybe in the top ten, but not at the very top with movies like "Casino Royale," "Goldfinger," "From Russia With Love," "On Her Majesty's Secret Service," . . . or even "Skyfall." But IMO, it certainly was not bad and it did not suck.
 
Last edited:

Nathan the Machinist

KnifeMaker / Machinist / Evil Genius
Moderator
Knifemaker / Craftsman / Service Provider
Joined
Feb 13, 2007
Messages
11,318
We saw it in a giant IMAX theater last night, and I could not disagree more strongly with your opinion of it.

I am guessing the difference is almost entirely in one's expectations. In fact, calling a movie a disappointment is entirely based on one's expectations.

It is very different than pretty much all previous Bond movies in several ways. But there were also lots of little tributes to past Bond movies. They even gave us martinis that were shaken, not stirred. However . . .

"Almost zero gadgets" . . . totally disagree. Maybe more gadgets than any of the Daniel Craig Bond movies, which did have "almost zero" in his first two Bond movies. A gadget folding glider / submersible. A couple of different cool gadget explosive devices. Two gadget cars, including the beloved Aston Martin DB5 loaded with gadgets (four Aston Martins in total appear in the film). Implanted tracking devices. It even had a frigging gadget watch! Which Q specifically told Bond in "Spectre" was the kind of thing that they don't go in for anymore. Almost zero gadgets? I say not.

Very short on action sequences? Again, I totally disagree. I bet Bond shoots, chokes, smashes and/or blows up more bad guys in this movie that in any other. Too many car, helicopter and motorcycle chase scenes, and too many shootouts, for me to count. The Havana shootout scene alone was terrific for action. Boats blown up. Cars blown up. Islands blown up. TONS of action.

"Very few femme fatales" . . . absolutely true! He isn't banging random chicks here - just one, his love and his partner. That might be a problem for some - not for me. I think fans of Bond had better get used to it, too, because the 1960s "Goldfinger" days of a womaning Bond slapping women on the butt are probably gone forever in the #MeTo 2020s.

Long? Also True. I'm guessing the longest Bond movie ever. But I did not find anything about the movie rambling. I never thought it dragged. I thought it was very well directed and edited. So who cares if it is long, as long as it's all entertaining?

And it made about as much sense as any other Bond movie . . . which as usual is not a whole lot. Realistic and rational plots has never been a feature of Bond movies. They have always required a certain suspension of disbelief, and I think this one requires no more or no less than they all do. I fact, I would say that the plot makes more sense than the majority of Bond movies, even some beloved ones like "Casino Royale," "Goldfinger," "From Russia With Love," and "Spectre."

I enjoyed it! But, to be fair, there has never been a Bond movie which I haven't enjoyed. I would rank it in the top half, maybe in the top ten, but not at the very top with movies like "Casino Royale," "Goldfinger," "From Russia With Love," "On Her Majesty's Secret Service," . . . or even "Skyfall." But IMO, it certainly was not bad and it did not suck.

Holy shit that was like a "legal argument" film review. ...surreal
 

yoko

Gold Member
Basic Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2011
Messages
1,247
Watched squid game on Netflix and enjoyed it a lot

Also a huge fan of the Korean kingdom series, for me it put walking dead to Shane majorly

I did like Shang chi a lot in the theater (I was comic book nerd when younger)

Also liked the new venom movie, but do not think it was as good as the first
 

Blues

hovering overhead
Staff member
Super Mod
Joined
Oct 2, 1998
Messages
26,411
squid-game-5db82c1.jpg
 

Richard338

Gold Member
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
2,581
We saw it in a giant IMAX theater last night, and I could not disagree more strongly with your opinion of it.

I am guessing the difference is almost entirely in one's expectations. In fact, calling a movie a disappointment is entirely based on one's expectations.

It is very different than pretty much all previous Bond movies in several ways. But there were also lots of little tributes to past Bond movies. They even gave us martinis that were shaken, not stirred. However . . .

"Almost zero gadgets" . . . totally disagree. Maybe more gadgets than any of the Daniel Craig Bond movies, which did have "almost zero" in his first two Bond movies. A gadget folding glider / submersible. A couple of different cool gadget explosive devices. Two gadget cars, including the beloved Aston Martin DB5 loaded with gadgets (four Aston Martins in total appear in the film). Implanted tracking devices. It even had a frigging gadget watch! Which Q specifically told Bond in "Spectre" was the kind of thing that they don't go in for anymore. Almost zero gadgets? I say not.

Very short on action sequences? Again, I totally disagree. I bet Bond shoots, chokes, smashes and/or blows up more bad guys in this movie that in any other. Too many car, helicopter and motorcycle chase scenes, and too many shootouts, for me to count. The Havana shootout scene alone was terrific for action. Boats blown up. Cars blown up. Islands blown up. TONS of action.

"Very few femme fatales" . . . absolutely true! He isn't banging random chicks here - just one, his love and his partner. That might be a problem for some - not for me. I think fans of Bond had better get used to it, too, because the 1960s "Goldfinger" days of a womaning Bond slapping women on the butt are probably gone forever in the #MeTo 2020s.

Long? Also True. I'm guessing the longest Bond movie ever. But I did not find anything about the movie rambling. I never thought it dragged. I thought it was very well directed and edited. So who cares if it is long, as long as it's all entertaining?

And it made about as much sense as any other Bond movie . . . which as usual is not a whole lot. Realistic and rational plots has never been a feature of Bond movies. They have always required a certain suspension of disbelief, and I think this one requires no more or no less than they all do. I fact, I would say that the plot makes more sense than the majority of Bond movies, even some beloved ones like "Casino Royale," "Goldfinger," "From Russia With Love," and "Spectre."

I enjoyed it! But, to be fair, there has never been a Bond movie which I haven't enjoyed. I would rank it in the top half, maybe in the top ten, but not at the very top with movies like "Casino Royale," "Goldfinger," "From Russia With Love," "On Her Majesty's Secret Service," . . . or even "Skyfall." But IMO, it certainly was not bad and it did not suck.
I find this review convincing and my hopes are back up. What sealed it is the list of best past movies which overlaps strongly with mine.
 

Richard338

Gold Member
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
2,581
I saw the Bond movie with my son as planned. Worth a watch. I drove 940 miles on Thursday and back again yesterday, loading a truck Friday and Saturday, so it was nice to relax. Only two other people in the theater.
Hard to put this new one in context of the series since I haven't seen some of the others in so long and I was a lot younger when they came out. My son really liked it.
 
Top