| Conegamer said: That was the point. The film was much more mythodical and played out like a game of cat-and-mouse with Silva, as opposed to just a massive shoot-out. It also showed that Bond and MI6, as well as others, aren't invinsible and are prone to errors. It was not supposed to be action-packed, but more suspense-driven so when something does happen it leaves an impact. This is why the scenes towards to end of the film in the house were so good; because you knew they were vulnerable. That happened rarely in past films, which was OK, but the film should not be criticised for doing something new. It has been 50 years; after all. I'm not sure what advertising was like in the US, but this was made very clear early on over here. This was not your traditional Bond film. It was one which demonstrated the frailties of the characters and how easily things can be brought down; as well as the transition from old to new. I liked that. |
So you agree that the action was trash? They could have at least made it good! I think I know why they didn't want to focus on the action: they didn't want to focus on trash.
