ext_12918: (Default)
ext_12918 ([identity profile] deralte.livejournal.com) wrote in [personal profile] schmevil 2008-11-17 07:31 am (UTC)

While I agree with a lot of what you said, I think the movie was too long for watchers while needing to be longer in order to clarify certain plot points. For instance, that one example of M dealing with bureaucracy ordering her to take down Bond was so lightly touched upon, it made the next set of scenes with her meeting Bond in the hotel, then doing an about face and changing her mind a second later (and so letting him go) made her seem weak. Also, Bond shows her up quite a few times, especially in the first movie. Now, I think Bond would do this to anyone who was his boss, but I just wanted to point it out since you said he doesn't.

My brother said he liked this movie more than Casino Royale because it was more like an old Bond film. I found this intriguing simply because I didn't think it was much like an old Bond film at all (excepting the agent's death by being covered in oil and left in Bond's bed). But, then again, I found myself thinking nostalgically of the old Bond films a few times before reminding myself that new movies can't be that way - there is no more Cold War and now the enemies are secret, shadow organizations who no one can trace or know about. You're absolutely right in saying these are the metaphor for our times.

Post a comment in response:

If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

If you are unable to use this captcha for any reason, please contact us by email at support@dreamwidth.org