Definitely agree that it is Craig's best showing as Bond, though, to be fair, I've struggled to warm to him in the role in the previous 2 films.....He's lacked the charm of Connery (who is, by far, the best 007), as the writers have seemed intent to portray Bond as Jason Bourne MkII - At last, in Skyfall, Craig's portrayal had more of the 007 that filmgoers really want to see.

My only gripe with Skyfall is that it lacked the glamourous locations much associated with previous films - At times it felt like an episode of The Sweeney, with all the London background shots.

anyone go see Dredd? got some very good reviews but seems like there will not be another one due to lack of box office

Watched Argo last night and certainly 1 of the best films I've seen this year. 8.5/10

I actually quite liked Dredd. Didn't take on much, wasn't too ambitious, just a nicely done story that introduced the setting & the characters well. Was well up for a sequel, which as you say will sadly probably not happen.

Bet they'll do a sequel to The Amazing Spiderman though... no justice in this world!

Don't think the 3D (hard to see it in 2d apparently) helped and the lack of buzz before the release certainly didn't help. Add that to the adult cinema rating which was for me a bonus. I am pretty gutted actually was looking forward to another one or possibly more. Hasn't even clawed back the productions costs AFAIK

Gutting isn't it? It wasn't a brilliant film but it really had the potential to go places in sequels. I especially liked how it didn't absolutely smash you in the face with the moral ambiguity. They didn't put in THAT scene where the female Judge says "But Dredd, who's to say that YOU aren't as bad as THEM?" *accusing eyes*.

Also kudos to them for cutting a scene where Dredd was supposed to kiss her. That would've been painfully out of place!

Sadly from what I've read you're right. Doesn't look like it's made back the production costs. Probably no more Dredd. Yet we get FOUR bloody Twilight films!

SKYFALL

Spoilers....

=#FFFFFFOf the Craig films this is easily the best, and has some terrific set pieces throughout. However, I did think the over-reliance on 'hacking' to carry the story became a bit of a yawn. Also, the conceited 'villain-allows-himself-to-be-captured when-he-could-quite-easily-kill-his-enemies' thing was one of the most unbelievable plotlines I've seen in a film for years. Would love to know where Silva goes to to hire his army of mindless mercenaries who will follow him on his insane personal vengeance mission to inevitably die.

I should add I thoroughly enjoyed it. One just has to expect a large dollop of daft with any action film. Certainly had its flaws. Highlight for me was Dame Judi dropping an F-bomb, something NOBODY saw coming...

edited: Point taken Cronos, apologies

Thought folk were openly talking about it!

Well they will now, together with half the plot.

Hacking plays an integral part of the plot, Silva (must be the villain?) is on a mission of personal vengeance, he allows himself to be captured at some point and most of his henchmen die. And Judi Dench swears.

Anyhoooooo, caught Men in Black 3 last night, as good as any other MiBs, enjoyed it thoroughly. A plot that collapses under scientific scrutiny, but MiB isn't to be taken to seriously. A very enjoyable film.

Judge dredd, men in black and james bond on the last page

reckon norman and kermode must be shatting themselves

Wasn't that mad on [iSkyfall[/i. It was good but only better than [iCasino Royale[/i. I thought it was a step backwards from QoS.

Quantum of Solace was dog and people who say otherwise, just do so to try to make themselves out to be slightly leftfield and a bit 'edgy'.

Skyfall is a much more mainstream Bond, and all the better for it.

You know it is possible for somebody to like a film for reasons that are not linked to your own prejudices you know lol. I mean, I know most people don't like it but I could probably pick four or five action scenes from QoS that are better than all in [iSkyfall[/i bar the skyscraper scene which was shot well e.g. opening car chase, run through Sienna, the opera, scaffolding, plane.



I understand that and it's part of the reason why I was a bit meh after I'd seen it. I like films to be a little more unique and it seemed like they were trying to do something different with QoS. Instead they've decided they don't want to build a Ritz, Savoy or Plaza Athenee and are happy to just have Holiday Inns. Nothing wrong with that if you like Holiday Inns.

Anyone seen the trailer for World War Z? As a fan of the book I'm not too impressed tbh. I mean it looks like it could be a decent zombie film, but I think it'll lose something by going with fast zombies instead of slow.

Having fast, ant-like zombies that can climb walls by working together is one thing - completely missing the point of the zombie as a shambling, never-ceasing monster - but the biggest bollock-drop is turning this into 'Bradley Pitt Saves The World'. They did the same thing with I Am Legend and turned wonderful source material into a puddle of steaming dog diaorrhea.



I expect very little from World War Z alas.....

I agree that its always good to see a film with a tinge of uniqueness to them, but certain film 'franchises' (God, I hate that term

) don't need messing with and Craig's first two Bond films, especially QofS, were messed about with and left them looking like pretty bog standard spy thrillers, which when you are making a Bond film really isn't what people want to see.

Its like the Die Hard franchise - You know what you are getting before you enter the cinema, but it doesn't stop them being entertaining films....If you actually tinkered with them and tried to create a uniqueness, then it would probably make it a less enjoyable watch.

Spot on mate. Would have no problem if it just had a different name or something. But linking it with the book creates expectations that just aren't going to be met, especially when the source material is treated with contempt rather than respect!

Whereas if you don't tinker with them you get the [iDie Hard[/i franchise which also meets that criteria of making it a less enjoyable watch

Add to that Indiana Jones and in the future [iStar Wars[/i.

Saw Bond the other day, my view as a person that's actually never watched a Bond movie before (Don't know why, I just haven't) is that it was a pretty damn good film. About 8/9 out of 10. Now as a "Bond" movie I can't comment, but by it's own merits very good imo

Just seen End Of Watch it's a cracking film and would deffo recommend everyone to go see it.

How is that possible!

As a guy who quite likes his films I guess that's my biggest embarassment



I'm gonna have to sit down & start from the beginning one day. Franchises with depth like the bond films can be quite daunting to get in to from the outside

Watched Gambit last night, and would have to put it down as a disappointment, especially considering it was a Coen brothers film.

Without giving the script away, Rickman could have been more ott, Diaz was too ott and was,nt really suited to the film, whilst Firth,s acting was very flat and Eastenders quality.

4/10

Enjoyed Skyfall although not quite as good as Casino Royal for me.

The only issues with Skyfall is that it played it safe (perhaps understandably so after QOS).

It ticked all the right boxes for a Bond film without pushing any boundaries.

[iAwaydays.[/i BBC2 tonight.

Back in the day.


Decent soundtrack.

[urlhttp://www.awaydaysthemovie.com/[/url

I thought it was good. I just found it a little clichéd.