MovieChat Forums > Quint > Replies
Quint's Replies
She looked amazing in this movie. But dont take a look at her hands. Theyve shown her age.
It isnt so hard to get even for young ones with no movie experience (like you obviously). Dietrich played a woman which by herself played the role of a lying woman in front of a huge audience. You shouldnt forget that she was telling the truth the whole time in court! But when she was confronted with the letters, she herself gave to the defense attorney, this simply person had to play for the first time in front of an huge court audience. She had to play a caught liar. And no ordinary person will play this better then the person Dietrich played. Doing this in any other way would have been incredible stupid and would have destroyed the whole scene.
So next time you like to embarrass yourself ... try at least to think about the character you see at that scene.
Letting Bond die makes him the weakest Bond ever.
Like hyped for getting beaten down?
Showing Bond as a dumb loser which ultimately failed at solving problems isnt woke? Craig always was just a woke crybaby which failed at almost any problem he had to fight. But now he failed ultimately. Showing how old white men cant do anything correctly or solve any problems.
The results are way less then expected, cause they need at least $ 900 million to get even. And there are a lot of people still dont knowing how dumb and desastrous this movie is. Its like with Last Jedi. Many ordinary people thought that this is a new Star Wars movie (and not the worst desaster ever released within the franchise) and preordered tickets. Thats where they get the amazing box office results for the first weekend. And then, when it become known that this was pure trash, the box office results crashed as fast as never before in the franchises history. What that further meant was that Solo became the first ever Star Wars movie losing money and Star Wars IX got even less money then an almost indie movie like The Joker!
So yes: Its Get woke, go broke. And no, being dumb and full of hate never wasnt in any "time" successful. And giving being dumb and full of hate a new label like "inclusivity" or "diversity" (beside that neither of both are fulfilled with this new fascists) doesnt change a bit about that fact.
Moore Bond movies are just bashed by dumbheads which dont get what Bond is for mentally stable humans: a fairy tale for grown ups. It never was anything else. Bond is an idol saving mankind every now and then. Doing Bond movies in any other way means you are going into the territory of the incredible boring and bad aged Fleming books. There he was nothing else then a drunken serial killer. And no mentally stable person on this planet is interested in such boring trash.
Thats why the Moore era Bond movies were the best Bond movies. Cause they offered excitement and escapism. And with todays teenagers (focusing just on the depressing side of their own development and society) this is indeed something to fight. Cause otherwise you have to think about your destructive way of handling problems.
Yep, cause its that obvious I analyzed the whole movie just for scenes where it became more and more obvious. For example when the black women gave the 007 license back to Bond. There were no motivation to do that, cause until that point here character was drawn as egocentric and dumb. Such a character would never offering this license without any external pressure. That was the scene when it was almost clear that Bond dies at the end of the movie. And the scene were Bond farewells from his girlfriend, daughter and former 007 agent was just the topping on the whole movie :) .
And the motivation for getting killed was so incredible dumb. The real Bond would have lived on and they find a way to destroy thos bots and thats it. Thats why Bond is as famous. Cause he solves problems. But Craig (he never acted like Bond anyway) did what he always did. Failing at problems. And died doing so. Crybabies at work :) .
They sank the franchise with this movie. So Brocolli dont matter that much anymore. This movie is what Last Jedi was for Star Wars. The end.
Indeed the will do movies using this title. But audience wont care about them anymore, cause Bond as the character and the franchise itself is history.
Its economically intrinsic. Thats when your brain is working correctly and you dont need an external aid to tie your shoes any given morning :) (this request for studies or reports for something absolutley logical is so .... todays snowflakes thinking :) ).
Yep, check how successful Palpatines return was ;) . Even the almost indie movie Joker had better box office results.
And at lest 1-2 rich snowflakes will watch it for sure :) .
Im not so sure if it will work that way. Take a look at Star Wars. After the Solo and Star Wars IX desaster they stopped doing Star Wars movies. They will return for sure in a few years, but desasters have an effect on doing sequels/remakes.
Thats why I thought about 1-2 female Bond movies before the desastrous box office results will stop them for at least a decade.
Craig always was a desaster as Bond. His movies neither were excitement nor escapism. And he played a small guy without any charisma (anyone remember when some hotel guests threw their cars keys to him thinking that he was working as a car parking guy? He looked and acted that boring and meaningless. Such a scene would have been absolutely impossible with Connery or Moore).
He didnt appeared like Broccoli always wanted Bond movies to be (back when Bond was famous and successful): Pure excitement and every Bond better then the other. Thats why movies like Moonraker became so extremely successful. Cause they were fun and escapism to watch. A Craig movie on the other side was watching a weak crybaby how he failed to solve given problems.This wasnt an idol like Bond has to be (otherwise Bond movies are as boring and grey as the books from Fleming).
But whatever .... the Bond series is now history and we wont get any further Bond movies. So this is like beating a dead horse ;) .
I understand your point. But I was really surprised when Lord Of The Rings (I presume it was part III) won an big Oscar. It was an unwritten law back then that entertainment movies dont get the main Oscar. I dont say that Lord Of The Rings movies were bad (Iliked them all, beside that im not a fan :) ). Cause there were (IMHO :) ) better movies which also lost against "serious" movies. I took a few years to "forgive" Gandhi that it took the Oscars away from E. T. :) (to be serious E. T. was an awesome movie, cause it was done for group of ages. That story of the divorced single mother for adults. The SciFi parts for the teens. And E. T. itself for the kids. so smart and so fine connected by the master himself).
However :) ..... I would like to state Thelma and Louise as an awesome feminist movie. Indeed men are not often as bad as they were shown in this movie. But that doesnt matter at all, cause this wasnt a documentary ;) and it was about the friendship between this 2 women.
And yep, Ripley (or also WonderWoman) has shown that female main characters are awesome within action movies. Cause the story and the character development is believable. Whereas most of todays female main character movies are done by people .... which obviously never had visited a movie college before.
007 is a agent code. That could be given to anyone. James Bond is the characters name. You have ssen his parents gravestone. So sorry to tell, but Bond is dead. Forever (thats the usual timeframe for being dead ;) ).
Cause Kings Speech was a good movie :) . I even got that one on BluRay. And their bias back then was also a problem, cause they usually hated entertainment movies. Or at least gave them lower ratings. Whats indeed incredible stupid, cause both kind of movies can be, within their parameters, good or bad. For example Raiders Of The Lost Ark was way, way better then a good character centred movie like Kings Speech. On the opther side a movie like "The old man and the sea" was way better then Casino Royale (just to show that neither entertainment nor "serious" movies are better per se). That was the problem with the real critics back then. But this behaviour had at least one advantage: Raiders of the lost ark had a huge PR budget. So it didnt mattered anyway what they stated about this movie. But small movies like "Kings Speech" need any support they could get. And thats why their support for "serious" movies was a good thing and helped kickstarting the indie movie scene.
But todays access journalists on the other side are just afraid about their jobs. You could see their frustration when they sometimes get movies from smaller studios and try to destroy them with everything they have. Cause this small studio doesnt mean any risk for their jobs at all :) . So yes, real critics back then ha their problems too indeed-. But at least they had some good side (wouldnt had seen many good movies otherwise).
BTW Interesting discussion. Not so common on such platforms :) . Especially when woke is on of the topics of the discussion :) .
Indeed, rating a really bad movie correctly is trolling :) ! You hate your money, content consumer?
Take a look at RT and the scores for their usual Disney blockbusters. They are almost everytime way, way higher then the scores from the people whom financed thos movies. That doesnt mean, that the movies always got 100% :) .
And yep, Expendables is boring and could have been really good. But the script had no groove and the actors didnt have their karma anymore.
Bond, Leiter and Blofeld! The director really hated Bond movies and wanted to rape them ;) !