It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
OTT was only their middle name. CGI scenes that didn't look realistic at all were very common in various movies.
DAD resembles perfectly the 2001-2004 era of movies, if that is a good thing or not is in the eye of the beholder.
This movie was made only a year before DAD.
You are right, QOS shouldn't be on this list. It shouldn't be on this list, because it would have to resemble a Bond film first. So i'm all for purging QOS from this list.... and from existence.
QOS shouldn't be on this list. It shouldn't be on this list, because it would have to resemble a Bond film first. So i'm all for purging QOS from this list.... and from existence.[/quote]
=))
that's priceless.
it's true QOS is the one Bond movie where you simply could change the characters names and re-cast, leave everything else exactly the same and no one ever would even come up with the idea that it is supposed to be a Bond flick :))
A wise man here on the forums once told this theory which I think answers your questions. He (@DoubleOhNothing) said that every fictional character/story creates its own universe, in which a certain set of rules apply. Superman's world is completely different from the Star Trek series, but both live up to what they can and cannot do in their universe.
It's when those set rules get broken, things go awry.
Now let's take Bond, and see what we get:
1. James Bond is not superhuman, but of flesh and blood. Well trained, and far more lucky then anyone ever will be in real life, but vulnerable.
2. James Bond is a trained assassin, capable of fighting off more then a few schoolgirls.
3. The stunts in Bond-films ought to be as realisticly plausible as possible. They may not be possible, but they should at least be belevable.
4. same goes for the gadgets. We're still in 'real life' with Bond.
5. James Bond beds beautiful women.
6. Bond films are made with care and precision (as far as possible in the times they're made).
Now, if we take the films you mention, we can actually see them go wrong.
DAF fails at least at nr.1 when it comes to the story. Bond is going for revenge, but doesn't really seem to care. And certainly fails in a very, very big way at nr.6. Moonbuggy wheels cater through the screen, Connery himself doesn't seem to try to act, cars change sides in small alley's, etc.
MR. fails in a lesser way at nr. 1, but nr.3 is way out. as far as space, even. Moonrakers taking off from the back of planes? beeing send one after the other into space unnoticed? a complete space-station out there? etc. etc.
AVTAK goes wrong at nr.1, 2 and, notably, 5.
DAD falls flat at the most: 1,3,4 and 6.
QoS fails only at 6 I think. But agian, this list by far isn't complete. There should be some points about villains in there as well, but others can finish it. I think it's a fair way to judge the films, and is a certain way to show why DAD is, to most, by far the worst James Bond film to date.
Fails majorly at three too, but only once. The freefall was terrible...MR was much better, Jaws included.
Well there are limits to everything. The flapping of Jaws may be funny, but his walking away from that circustent is completely and utter nonsense. Even a very strong man, which Jaws obviously is, should be extremely hurt, if not dead. It's here that the stunt goes askew. Jaws, in the end, remains human. Well, should do so, and he clearly doesn't in MR, even though he falls in love. And tbh, I think that was put in to bring him back again, because the producers understood they had made an invinceable enemy.
And yes, the space station may have been a real set, the laser fight is utter bonkers. MR is off too long to be forgiven for it's flaws I think.
But, for me, its not the worst as it does benefit from EXCELLENT cinematography.
DAF and MR are both are presented as pure camp. But one works for me and the other doesn't. DAF is awful in a good way; MR is just awful. I think the reason is that MR still has elements in which it's trying to take itself seriously. The first act, at Drax's estate, for instance, is played straight and contains some compelling moments. Corinne's demise in the woods is a great scene and contains some of Barry's best music. After that, the film unravels and just gets worse and worse. It's embarrassingly bad.
DAF has no redeeming qualities and that IS its redeeming quality. It's the one Bond film that seems to have been written and directed on dope. It's so effin' bad that I can't help embracing it, in all its ugliness. But I can certainly see why fans would despise this film.
AVTAK: I'm not sure this one is as widely disliked as some of the others. Why was it included here? Again, I agree with the notion that Moore was too old. Plus, the Beach Boys music in the PTS is bad. But AVTAK is saved by Christopher Walken and Grace Jones and a decent plotline.
DAD? This is where Bond "jumped the shark" and EON realized it needed to go back to basics. Thank God.
QoS: Critics hated the film's action. Roger Ebert said "James Bond is not an action hero." And he's right. He's not. The film went at break-neck speed, at times to its detriment. But...it still has Daniel Craig, some interesting settings, a compelling plot, and has the best "Bond is a badass" fight scene in the whole franchise, when Bond wastes Slate in less than a minute.
Not all critics bashed the action sequences ...maybe the style/editing. I think some of the action is missed like Bond's boat brushing by the larger boat during the chase.. small example but still some added thought there other than just a host chase.
Indeed. I wouldn't argue against that. But it's another reason why MR is so difficult to watch. A lot of good work got wasted. With DAF, there was no attempt to make any of it look good. It's so bad it has the opposite effect on me.
I understand what you mean, DAF feels like the entire cast and crew showed up on set every day and spent the whole time pitching the most insane ideas while smoking some very strong weed.
38 years later, people are still talking about the union jack parachute jump. No-one is going to mention the QoS PTS car chase or dogfight in 31 years (except on bond forums)
But is anyone still talking about the Bond/Jaws freefall, too? Not really.
The jump in TSWLM wasn't iconic because of Bond; it's become iconic because it was ahead of its time in the world of extreme sports. It was a game-changer.
Shane McConkey was heavily infleunced by that jump and decades later, paid tribute to it:
my opinion, of course, but there is nothing...NOTHING...great, good or slightly entertaining in DAD. That movie was the worst Bond movie of the series and is one of the worst films in cinema history, ever made. Again, just my opinion as a 42 year old Bond fanatic.
QOS suffered from the writers' strike. Could have been great...hopefully SPECTRE will help breathe new life into QOS
AVTAK...meh. Definitely Moore's age was an issue. Stacy Sutton's incessant, hoarsy screaming was like nails on a chalkboard. She was well past her Charlie's Angels peak
DAF could have been the best bond ever. We need George to come back and we needed a direct continuation from Majesty's. Instead, we got an overweight, tired Connery who starred in the first Moore-era Bond of the series.
That leaves what is one of my favorite films, Moonraker. OK, it was WAY WAY over the top, but prior to Craig-era Bonds, wasn't that the idea of all Bond films? Moonraker has an amazing score (Far better than Barry's AVTAK score and one of the top of the series), one of, if not the best pre-title sequence, more action per minute of film than most other Bond films, tremendous dialogue ("You missed Mr. Bond....Did I???") the 007-Theme (last time we've heard it, by the way) terrific stunts, award-winning special effects (Academy Award nominated, if I remember correctly)....Obviously, one of my faves.
It will probably more in the style of: what the heck happened with that Craig Bloke, on good starting movie CR and then he got the pretentious directors that forgot to make decent thriller first and then add great action instead we got rubbish filmed very well.
That'll do too :))
Everyone has an opinion. Why hate DAD so much? Minus the OTT second half its just a Bond film with all the Bond elements of old.
I'm NOT judging or being sarcastic ...to me your disdain for DAD seems overly harsh... that's just my opinion and NOT meant as rude.
I wasn't necessarily disagreeing with the critisms per se ..
DAF
I don't know how this film was received critically back in the day (i wasnt born until 1984, and really didn't start paying attention to films indepth until about 1998ish)... but compared to Connery's other Bond films, it's too silly, too camp, too comic book, too audacious - whatever else you want to throw in... coming off what could be regarded as the the most grim moment in Bond's history, this one plays everything for laughs - which i do know back then people wanted to forget OHMSS ever happened.. but today looking back, people view DAF as a real missed opportunity.
MR
It's a carbon copy of TSWLM, lets just call it what it really is.. much like DAF, it really pushes the absurdity envelope a little farther than it probably should've been... TSWLM pushed things to the limit, but i felt like it never really tried to cross the line and "jump the shark" - this one (for the time) jumped the shark... in terms of the film though, it's fairly decent, until it gets to space where things take a very Star Wars turn... i've always said that the 3rd act of this movie could've just stayed at the amazon shuttle base, and it would've been much better..
AVTAK
Rog was getting on by that point... many debate he should've hung it up after FYEO, but i still felt like he turned in a great performance in OP - and being opposite Maud Adams helped with the whole age thing... but AVTAK really should've either been Dalton's start, or even Broz's possible start... but beyond the age, they wrote Bond very generic - and it didn't play to Moore's strengths - and by that i mean, if you look at Moore in OP and then him in AVTAK, he seems more stern in AVTAK and doesn't seem to be his usual self... i think Walken turns in a terrific performance, even if it's a bit hammy (but it's Walken - com'on lol).. but Grace Jones as May Day and Tanya Roberts and Stacy Sutton really leave a lot to be desired - especially Ms Roberts... her constant wailing really makes the 2nd half of the movie a chore to sit through.
DAD
What can be said about this movie that hasn't been said before... EON tried waay too hard to pay homage to themselves after 40 years of Bond movies - and instead of creating something memorable in a good way, we end up getting something memorable in a bad - almost evil way lol... it's like going to a concert for your favorite band, but instead you've been tricked into going to see a lame cover band who sings every song out of tune... that is what DAD is to the Bond films that came before it - it's a greatest hits compilation performed terribly by a cover band.
QOS
The only real thing that bothers me in this film is the lack of a full cohesive script/story (but that's the fault of trying to rush this film through the writer's strike, when EON perhaps should've waited - but they wanted to strike while the iron was still hot from CR, so who could blame them)... the editing during some of the action is a bit jarring, as was the camera work - namely during the boat chase.. i can follow almost everything else, but that boat chase looks like it was shot with the camera being locked in a laundry tumble dryer that was turned on.
It's seen as a blueprint for the 70s Moore outings, but it's different to them in many ways. The seedy underbelly of Las Vegas is unpleasant, the strange doubling up of the baddies, Wint and Kidd, Bambi and Thumper, Blofeld and..Blofeld, the weird convoluted plot, the sound and editing which attack the senses. It's a Bond film, but seriously like no other.
I usually watch it with my jaw hanging open, but I do keep going back to it. For best results, smoke something illegal prior to watching.
DAD for example. To use another acronym, is a POS, no two ways about it. Terrible acting by most (Brosnan and Pike excepted), a horrendous title track, a disgraceful score, & a plot not even worthy of Austin P. A 40th anniversary shame in many ways, thankfully redeemed 10 yrs later by EON with that other anniversary installment, SF. That's the reason for the hate here, imho.
QoS. It's the Bourne like editing, which is taken to such an extreme that it effectively ruins the action sequences (which it appears, if you slow the film down, to have been painstakingly thought through, but which you can't really make out sadly). Additionally, it's the dialogue, which is quite bare and stripped down compared to other Bond films. Finally, it's the fact that it's quite different from its lauded predecessor, and for many who enjoyed CR, is too much of a break from what many thought would be a new approach. For many, SF is closer to a CR sequel, at least in feel, than QoS, which is more Bourne'esque. However, I personally love this film. It's like a speeding bullet, which was the intention of the director.
DAF. Here it's Connery's weight and bad toupe that's problematic for some, particularly those who were so impressed with his presence in the earlier films. For a relatively young man at the time, he really let himself go physically. Additionally, the production values seem cheap compared to YOLT or TB. It also does have that cheesy Vegas TV show style to it, which was at that point a far cry from Bond films made to date, which all seemed so extravagant and exotic. Finally, it's the fact that it doesn't really seem to follow on from OHMSS, which it should have done. The earlier film is almost forgotten except for a brief bit in the pretitles. Don't get me wrong, this film has grown on me with every recent watch (particularly the excellent dialogue by Connery), but I can understand its low ranking in a franchise that is as much about the aesthetic as the substance for some.
AVTAK. Similarly here, the protagonist seems somewhat past it and disinterested, particularly compared to his stellar and praised earlier performances. Furthermore, the production values again are relatively cheap, particularly for the Moore era, which is known for some of the most expensive sets and technical work. For me, this one is quite forgettable and should not have been made. Moore should have packed it in on an all time high with the previous installment.
MR. As I mentioned on another thread, here it's the intentional decision to self-parody which is at fault, combined with too much humour in parts where the film should have been more serious, and an overabundance of gadgetry which conveniently assists Bond at moments when he should be more at risk. One never feels that Bond is threatened here (centrifuge excepted) since he always seemed to find a way out of a bind with some new device. As Drax stated: "Mr. Bond, you persist in defying my efforts to provide an amusing death for you". The space section seems very much like a cynical attempt to capitalize on the Star Wars/Trek craze of the time, and most damningly, it just isn't as good a film as its predecessor and seems too much like a cut and paste job with a larger budget. It's actually a guilty pleasure for me, and I always try to watch it with TSWLM since they go well together.
Yeah, but the Edgar Bug in MEN IN BLACK was from 1997 and looks tons better than most stuff from before OR since (and done as an after-the-fact to 'fix' the ending, something I only recently discovered), so it isn't just a matter of years, and both films feature effects by the same vendor.