Reviews of THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS

2

Comments

  • Posts: 4,762
    @thelivingroyale: Exactly. Each one brings something new to the table, and it has helped define not only their performance but also their respective Bond era. Connery's flaw for me was that he tended to be really boring in many scenes, and he seemed as if he could think of millions of other things to be doing rather than a Bond movie.
  • Posts: 1,310
    I'll go ahead and finally play the review game here! I've been seeing this post show up for days now and I'm finally giving in ;-)

    LIVE AND LET DIE

    Overall Movie Rating: I'd given LALD a 7/10 which mathematically translates to a 3.5/5
    Snooze Rating: 3
    Bond actor Rating: 3

    The good: Live and Let Die is unique in it's story; that voodoo stuff actually kind of worked in context. Also, Live and Let Die has some underrated villains, none more so than Tee Hee. He was a fantastic henchman, and even perhaps one of the best of the series. (Also, Tee Hee's fight with Bond at the end is Moore's best fight by far.) Roger Moore does a fine job here; he plays the role fairly conservatively, but is far better than he would be in The Man with the Golden Gun. Solitare is Moore's best leading lady. Oh, and naturally Paul McCartney's theme tune!!!!

    The bad: Kanaga's death is quite different, but kind of lame and a bit underwhelming to be honest. Rosie Carver was just horrible, but she was in the film for only 10 minutes or so, and therefore doesn't hurt the film as much as she could have. J.W. Pepper isn't as annoying and pitiful here as he is in Golden Gun, but I've never cared for the character. The film itself is a tad too long.

    Closing comment: I've always thought Live and Let Die as a solid Bond picture. It's not an excellent Bond film, mind you, but the excellent villains and unique story give it some merit. It does get slow towards the end, but that fight on the train half makes up for it.

    Overall, I always have enjoyed Live and Let Die and hold it in a good light!
  • edited October 2011 Posts: 5,745
    Thanks for all the feedback and reviews!
    LIVE AND LET DIE beat out GOLDENEYE!
    I finally posted my LALD review, its farther up the thread ^^ if your interested.

    Now we've officially moved on to TOMORROW NEVER DIES.
    I'm very interested in how you guys feel about the follow up to the very popular GOLENEYE. My review will be posted separately at a later time.

    And..... REVIEW!

  • edited October 2011 Posts: 1,310
    Hey I just reviewed Live and Let Die; I'm on a role!!!!

    TOMORROW NEVER DIES

    Overall Movie Rating: 3.5/5
    Snooze Rating: 3
    Bond Actor Rating 3.5

    The Good: Brosnan is so much better here than he was in GoldenEye; he is not stiff and is not acted off the screen by his co-stars. Maybe that says something about the co-stars of TND, but I've never had a problem with them. Jonathan Pryce is great as the over the top Elliot Carver. Some action scenes are exciting with a special nod going to the car park chase. I've always liked Bond's execution of Dr. Kaufmann also; the first half of the film (everything up to the end of the car park chase) is very good overall.

    The Bad: The film's ending is can be enjoyed only if you zone out and enjoy the fireballs. Some days I'm feeling that way, but most of the time I am not. Bond shouldn't just be a shoot 'em up adventure and the last half of Tomorrow Never Dies somewhat gives up. It is kind of a let down, especially after a strong first half. Sometimes you can get bored watching TND's last half.

    Closing Comment: Tomorrow Never Dies improves on GoldenEye only in Brosnan's performance as Bond. GoldenEye is a better film and that's that. That being said, I think TND gets a little more hate than deserved and is half fun in a popcorn way. Perhaps some of us despise that idea, but TND does shoot 'em up the best it can be done. The thing is though: I expect a little more from a Bond picture.
  • edited October 2011 Posts: 1,894
    TOMORROW NEVER DIES

    Overall - 2.5 / Snooze factor - 2 / Bondliness - 3

    What works: Bond is much smarter this time around, able to work things out in advance. Alec seriously got the drop on him in GOLDENEYE graveyard scene, but Bond is far less reactionary - baiting Carver into an embarrassing performance at the party, for instance.

    What doesn't: The plot. I don't see TOMORROW NEVER DIES as a letdown, but more an example of squandered opportunity. Elliot Carver is, at most, a glorified henchman; General Chang is a much bigger threat, but gets two mentions in the plot. Wai Lin is one of the better examples of a "Bond's equal", but there is no sexual tension between her and Bond. There is also an over-emphasis on action in the last forty-five minutes; we go from the HALO jump to the scuba sequence, the skyscraper jump (which was actually very original), motorcycle chase, the jump over the helicopter, the destruction of said helicopter, the big fight between Wai Lin and Chang's men, and the assault on the stealth boat, all with minimal downtime between sequences.

    Open Mic Night: Given the chance to re-write the film, I probably would have put a much greater emphasis on General Chang (who I would rename to something less generic, like General Pheng). Upset with the way China has 'softened', the General has decided it is time for a new age of Chinese enlightenment. However, his outspoken views have attracted unwanted attention and criticism from his compatriots, and he is forced to seek outside help. He enlists Elliot Carver's help, with the promise of exclusive broadcase rights for the media mogul. The film lagely progresses in the same way with the sinking of the Devonshire and the missing GPS encoder, but Bond and Wai Lin focus on the General. They work out his plans, and manage to get him detained in Beijing. They then focus on Carver, who realises that he will not get his broadcast rights, and so decides to launch the missile at Beijing regardless, figuring that he will get coverage of the single biggest event in human history. I think this would make for a much more-rounded approach and an overall-better film.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    ime between sequences.
    Open Mic Night: Given the chance to re-write the film, I probably would have put a much greater emphasis on General Chang (who I would rename to something less generic, like General Pheng). Upset with the way China has 'softened', the General has decided it is time for a new age of Chinese enlightenment. However, his outspoken views have attracted unwanted attention and criticism from his compatriots, and he is forced to seek outside help. He enlists Elliot Carver's help, with the promise of exclusive broadcase rights for the media mogul. The film lagely progresses in the same way with the sinking of the Devonshire and the missing GPS encoder, but Bond and Wai Lin focus on the General. They work out his plans, and manage to get him detained in Beijing. They then focus on Carver, who realises that he will not get his broadcast rights, and so decides to launch the missile at Beijing regardless, figuring that he will get coverage of the single biggest event in human history. I think this would make for a much more-rounded approach and an overall-better film.
    Interesting take @shadowonthesun. It sounds very good for a quick write up.
  • Posts: 5,745

    Open Mic Night:
    Hahahahahahahahaha, creative.

    Open Mic Night: Given the chance to re-write the film, I probably would have put a much greater emphasis on General Chang (who I would rename to something less generic, like General Pheng). Upset with the way China has 'softened', the General has decided it is time for a new age of Chinese enlightenment. However, his outspoken views have attracted unwanted attention and criticism from his compatriots, and he is forced to seek outside help. He enlists Elliot Carver's help, with the promise of exclusive broadcase rights for the media mogul. The film lagely progresses in the same way with the sinking of the Devonshire and the missing GPS encoder, but Bond and Wai Lin focus on the General. They work out his plans, and manage to get him detained in Beijing. They then focus on Carver, who realises that he will not get his broadcast rights, and so decides to launch the missile at Beijing regardless, figuring that he will get coverage of the single biggest event in human history. I think this would make for a much more-rounded approach and an overall-better film.
    Interesting take @shadowonthesun. It sounds very good for a quick write up.
    Agreed. Sounds like a much better film and a very good Bond film. More so than what came to be. What we did get was the result of bad writing. It almost seemed rushed, like the writer(s) were going steady and creating gold, and then got a memo that said "you have one less month" or something.

    Shadow, all the posts we've been through, I think you need to get into story-boarding for Eon :) Always full of creative and excellent ideas.
  • Posts: 1,894
    Well, I'm afraid I can't claim credit on this one. Someone on another forum pointed out that Elliot Carver's motivations subtly change halfway through the film without any real explanation. So I figured that instead of correcting it, I'd run with it and radically change his motivations while providing an explanation of it. I think the likes of Bruce Feirstein originally would have gone with soemthing like this, but the Chinese are notoriously touchy about being portrayed "accurately".

    I'd love to write a Bond film one day, but it's a pretty far-fetched prospect at the moment. Maybe I could do a Jeffrey Deaver - write a string of successful novels and then drop hints that I'd like to write for Bond.
  • Posts: 4,762
    Overall: 4.7/5
    Snooze Factor: 5
    Bond: 5/5

    The Good: A condensed Bond movie that crams in so much action within the 1 hour 55 minute or so time limit that you never get bored! Every scene is a rip-roaring adevnture, and the action is always essential, not just for show or attention-holder. The characters themselves contribute to the story in great ways, maybe except for Paris. I didn't really like her too much, but that's for later discussion. Carver, Stamper, and Dr. Kaufman were really great villains, and classics for the Brosnan era! Henry Gupta was decent, but was somewhat underused. I really wish his card trick from the deleted scenes had been used to enhance his character. The music was also pretty good, and even epic in some select scenes, particularly the climax.

    The Bad: Paris Carver and Wai Lin's "I can do anything you can do" attitude. I can't really think of anything else, because it was too great a movie!

    Open Comment: One of my Top 5 favorites; such a magnificent Bond movie which has something for everyone.
  • Posts: 5,745
    Overall: 4.7/5
    Snooze Factor: 5
    Bond: 5/5

    The Good: A condensed Bond movie that crams in so much action within the 1 hour 55 minute or so time limit that you never get bored! Every scene is a rip-roaring adevnture, and the action is always essential, not just for show or attention-holder. The characters themselves contribute to the story in great ways, maybe except for Paris. I didn't really like her too much, but that's for later discussion. Carver, Stamper, and Dr. Kaufman were really great villains, and classics for the Brosnan era! Henry Gupta was decent, but was somewhat underused. I really wish his card trick from the deleted scenes had been used to enhance his character. The music was also pretty good, and even epic in some select scenes, particularly the climax.

    The Bad: Paris Carver and Wai Lin's "I can do anything you can do" attitude. I can't really think of anything else, because it was too great a movie!

    Open Comment: One of my Top 5 favorites; such a magnificent Bond movie which has something for everyone.
    I have to say I'm a little surprised by this review. Not sure there are many others that share this view of TOMORROW NEVER DIES with you. Good post :) Verrrrry interesting.
  • Posts: 1,407
    Overall: 3.5/5

    Snooze: 5

    Bond: 4/5

    The Good: The movie works best when viewed as a popcorn Bond movie that has all the right elements. This movie isn't a work of art and it doesn't try to be. It's loud, fun, stupid, and awesome. Brosnan's performance isn't as good as his Goldeneye debut but to be fair, that film required much more "acting." But he does give a great Bond performance overall and is one of the movies strongest points. I may be in the minority, but I love Jonathan Pryce as Carver. He works as an over the top baddie and his scheme for ratings is fine. Wai-Lin is my favorite of Brosnan's Bond girls. She is tough, sexy, and funny. Dr. Kaufman is my favorite modern henchman, enough said. Also, the David Arnold score is fantastic and makes me wonder why so many fans are against him. And as a final good note, this film has a great pace that keeps the viewer very interested.

    The Bad: While the character of Paris Carver is an interesting concept, Teri Hatchers performance doesn't do it for me. No matter how sexy she looks (and she does), there is just something missing from her. While i like the films pace, the ending action scene is a bit overdone at times and turns Bond into a machine gun action hero. The party scene doesn't seem too "Bond" for me. When Carver's men come to get him, Bond obviously knows what is happening. It is building up to a great "how is he going to get the drop on them" moment. And then they start beating him silly! Only by fighting back AFTER the fight started is he able to get out of there. Just seemed a bit confusing to me.

    Other Thoughts: I really enjoy this movie and is one I watch with friends when we want a quick action movie. When this is viewed as a popcorn middle of the road Bond flick instead of the next From Russia With Love, it can be enjoyed greatly!

    One other note: This was my first review on here so if anybody has any suggestions, please let me know
  • SexpionageSexpionage Suspended
    Posts: 49
    Brosnan was fed poorly written
    scripts , the producers should have
    made brosnan play the role as a hot
    tempered mean bastard who is
    sneaky and all about being deceptive.
    Imagine if one of Brosnans 007 films
    had him opening up the movie with
    him in a long black trench coat with a
    silenced ppk and Brosnan slaps a
    woman asking for information , she
    wont give in , then minutes later a
    guard walks behind him and he uses
    the woman as a body shield and she
    dies .. ..now that's the way Pierce
    should have played bond
  • Posts: 1,894
    the producers should have made brosnan play the role as a hot tempered mean bastard who is sneaky and all about being deceptive.
    Isn't that how you wanted Brosnan to play Scaramanga?
    Yes Pierce Brosnan, he would play an amazing scaramanga, I can see it now him wearing a white tuxedo smoking a cigar with his silenced golden gun at his side. He would play the role as a mean,ruthless horribly tempered maniac that is absolutely capable of any act of torture.
    *gasp* It is!
    Imagine if one of Brosnans 007 films had him opening up the movie with him in a long black trench coat with a silenced ppk and Brosnan slaps a woman asking for information , she wont give in , then minutes later a guard walks behind him and he uses the woman as a body shield and she dies .. ..now that's the way Pierce should have played bond
    That's not Bond. Even in the 1960s, when violence towards women was not the social taboo that it is today, that is not how Bond was portrayed. Bond was always a gentleman; sure, he used Fiona Volpe as a human shield, but she was willing - and indeed, intending - to kill him. Bond killing a woman for being uncooperative would have been poorly received in the 1960s; the audiences would have screamed blue murder if he did it in the 1990s and 2000s.
  • SexpionageSexpionage Suspended
    Posts: 49
    bond murders people all the time and audiences don't jump in their seats, what difference would it make
    if he used a woman as a bodyshield who is on the opposing side ? I guess I am too politically incorrect for your soft tastes.
  • Posts: 1,894
    Yes, Bond kills people all the time. But he only ever kills them for a reason that is justified. Either, in the case of the primary villain, they pose a thread to the world (ie Renard is preparing to trigger a nuclear meltdown); or the killing is in self-defence (for example, Mr. Slate attacks Bond).

    However, in your version of event, Bond asks a woman for information. She refuses to answer. He slaps her, and continues with her refusal. So he kills her for it. She does not pose a threat to the world, and nor does she attack. Bond commits outright murder - not justifiable homicide.
  • SexpionageSexpionage Suspended
    Posts: 49
    I never said bond kills her for no reason , I said bond uses her as a bodyshield so he doesn't get shot by the guard coming from behind him. big difference
  • Posts: 1,894
    No, I mean a reason for actually killing her. To protect himself is not an option - Bond doesn't do that. Sure, he used Fiona Volpe as a human shield, but she was setting him up to get shot. By your own description of this scene, Bond is already armed, and because he uses the woman as a shield, he is therefore aware enough of the shooter to be able to react in time. Therefore, using her as a shield is completely unnecessary.

    All you've done is created a scene that is as politically-incorrect as possible, and mistaken it for being "badass". If this scene happened as an introduction, with Bond using an unarmed woman as a human shield when she poses no immediate threat to him or to anyone else, then the only thing you're going to trigger in the audience is revulsion. The idea is vulgar, unnecessary, and worst of all, completely out of character for Bond. Your description of him as "a hot tempered mean bastard who is sneaky and all about being deceptive" speaks to a fundamental misinterpretation of the character. He is not hot-tempered; he is cool and dispassionate. He is not a mean bastard; he can be cold when the situation demands it, but he he takes no pleasure in violence or causing distress. He is not "sneaky and all about being deceptive"; his preferred weapon is confrontation once he is convinced of guilt.
  • M_BaljeM_Balje Amsterdam, Netherlands
    edited October 2011 Posts: 4,537
    TMND:

    Good:

    Brosnan look like more in his place in the part.
    More humor
    More spying
    Eliot Carver be one of my favorite villian, mabey he is my favorite from the whole Brosnan era whyle i like Alec too.

    Plot. On this point the movie wins a lot, of course the movie need more views i understand it and like it. It be a a litle bit like the old days and also it bring something new. The plot of Twine, DAD, CR and QOS all of them be person personal whyle this one isn't personal in the meaning of a person but for the country.

    Bad:

    It be the last movie where the lead Bondgirls both be played by older actres. Twine & DAD be fifty fifty if i count Sophie Marceu as a older actres, but a bad thing be that
    CR the Bond girls all of them a have younger age. QOS too, but Fields not be a standard Bond girl and of course Mathis his girl something extra.

    TMND started with the smaller villian lairs. The stealth boat scene's be my last favorite things of the movie with the exeption that Wailin be involved. All movies after this disapointed me more. Goldeneye realy be the last Bond movie with a big villian lair and fight. TMND isn't bad if we look to the end of Die Another Day and CR. The sinking house looks like a cinematopgraphy copy from the submarine and thaught me less because i feels nothing for Vesper chacter.

    It not be a movie i like from the start. Not be a big fan of Stamper, but i don't say he be a big problem of the movie.

    The movie have sometimes be a litle to dark, in specialy the stealth boat.

    Opencomment:

    Having the luxery my fandom start falling in a very good promotion of the movie.

    Tomorrow Never Dies stays on number 1 or 2 from the movies i have seen the moost. Overall the movie is rank 3/22 and 7.5/10, Brosnan 3/4.

    We need a new Tomorrow Never Dies if we look to the plot with the difrence that is not be for 1 or 2 country's but for the world.
  • doubleonothingdoubleonothing Los Angeles
    Posts: 864
    TND. It's like Johnny English without the irony or wit.
  • Posts: 5,745

    One other note: This was my first review on here so if anybody has any suggestions, please let me know
    Nothing to add here, great review!

    Any suggestions anybody? Something Connery or Dalton, if you could.

  • Posts: 1,407
    How about the love it or hate it DAF?

  • Going to keep it short

    Tomorrow Never Dies, right off the bat, it's an awful name for a Bond movie, it is just me or does the title make no sense whatsoever?

    Johnathan Pryce makes for a lame bad guy, he was much more convincing in 'Ronin' which came out the following year, Teri Hatcher a poor Bond girl, more churlish than gorgeous if anything else, Sheryl Crow did a fine effort with the music, the best I think up to Cornell's You Know My Name

    Once it gets to the part where Bond leaves Germany and off to China I seem to lose interest, it gets as boring and banal as Goldfinger for the most part, never liked the bike scenes with Michelle Yeoh, the ending about the stealth ship seems uninspired and I seem to remember being half asleep in the theater when it reached the last third

    Nowhere near Brosnan's best but the teaser at the Russian arms fair is a fun 15 minutes or so and actually generates tension and suspense. Not one of my favorite Bond efforts by a long chalk and it was no surprise it took a back seat to opening day sales as Cameron's Titanic was released the same week
  • Posts: 4,762
    You Only Live Twice for the next review, possibly?
  • edited October 2011 Posts: 1,894
    Tomorrow Never Dies, right off the bat, it's an awful name for a Bond movie, it is just me or does the title make no sense whatsoever?
    It was originally called "Tomorrow Never Lies" because Carver's newspaper, the Tomorrow supposedly never lied - since Carver was manufacturing the news. It got changed in an early draft after a typo in the heading.
  • Posts: 5,745
    How about the love it or hate it DAF?

    You Only Live Twice for the next review, possibly?
    Somebody, choose!
  • I'd be happy to do The Man with the Golden Gun (in it's own space) if other participants are OK with it, was the last Bond movie I watched

    Maybe it's been done already ahead of time, but in any event..
  • edited October 2011 Posts: 1,310
    I'd be happy to do The Man with the Golden Gun (in it's own space) if other participants are OK with it, was the last Bond movie I watched

    Maybe it's been done already ahead of time, but in any event..
    I'd be happy to review that pile of garbage ;)
  • I can't do it now, pressed for time, I just need the green light to go ahead, in it's own thread if you'd be so kind

    Golden Gun is not so bad
  • Posts: 5,745
    I can't do it now, pressed for time, I just need the green light to go ahead, in it's own thread if you'd be so kind

    Golden Gun is not so bad
    I hold no power over what discussions you create, and have no negative opinions towards you reviewing each movie separately. I'm looking for this thread to do a Connery, Lazenby, or Dalton film next, but you can start somewhere else if you'd like. Its not up to me what you do.

    :)
  • Posts: 5,745
    Our good friend Baltimore_007 is reviewing THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN on this thread:

    http://www.mi6community.com/index.php?p=/discussion/1566/the-man-with-the-golden-gun-1974-all-talk-in-here-please#Item_3

    Stop by if interested. As for us, we'll be moving on to YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE, to coincide with @Shadowinthesun 's recent discussion on using elements from the book. His discussion is here:

    http://www.mi6community.com/index.php?p=/discussion/1564/unused-fleming-content-can-it-be-filmeds#Item_7

    Post your reviews of YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE on Wednesday, please :)
Sign In or Register to comment.