007: What would you have done differently?

1353638404156

Comments

  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    Gibson turned down both Batman and Bond.

    I’m sure you know Brosnan also turned down Batman.

    Yes, but sadly not Bond.
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    Gibson turned down both Batman and Bond.

    I’m sure you know Brosnan also turned down Batman.
    Yes, but sadly not Bond.
    Fortunately not Bond. ;)
  • Posts: 11,425
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    GE is one of a handful of Bond films (the others being GF, TSWLM and SF) that were huge hits but which also have a very outspoken group of critics who like to emphasize how overrated they are.

    it's sacrilege to even mention GE in the same breath as GF and TSWLM.

    you can lump it with SF if you want but even I would acknowledge that SF is an infinitely superior film on pretty much every front- and I can't stand SF.

    You’d be surprised at how vocal some people can be about both GF and TSWLM.

    if there are fans insane enough to claim that GE is a classic it doesn't surprise me there are others laying into GF and TSWLM - two sides of the same coin
  • ClarkDevlinClarkDevlin Martinis, Girls and Guns
    Posts: 15,423
    Getafix wrote: »
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    GE is one of a handful of Bond films (the others being GF, TSWLM and SF) that were huge hits but which also have a very outspoken group of critics who like to emphasize how overrated they are.

    it's sacrilege to even mention GE in the same breath as GF and TSWLM.

    you can lump it with SF if you want but even I would acknowledge that SF is an infinitely superior film on pretty much every front- and I can't stand SF.

    You’d be surprised at how vocal some people can be about both GF and TSWLM.

    if there are fans insane enough to claim that GE is a classic it doesn't surprise me there are others laying into GF and TSWLM - two sides of the same coin
    It would be quite an abominable insanity if there would be a fan who'd say GE isn't a classic.
  • edited June 2018 Posts: 11,189
    Getafix wrote: »
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    GE is one of a handful of Bond films (the others being GF, TSWLM and SF) that were huge hits but which also have a very outspoken group of critics who like to emphasize how overrated they are.




    it's sacrilege to even mention GE in the same breath as GF and TSWLM.

    you can lump it with SF if you want but even I would acknowledge that SF is an infinitely superior film on pretty much every front- and I can't stand SF.

    You’d be surprised at how vocal some people can be about both GF and TSWLM.

    if there are fans insane enough to claim that GE is a classic it doesn't surprise me there are others laying into GF and TSWLM - two sides of the same coin

    Quite a lot of people would call GE a classic Bond film in the sense that it was the one which got them into the series. I'm one of them. As I've said before its hands-down my most watched Bond film in the 22 years I've been a fan. That makes it a classic in my eyes...or at least an important Bond film.
  • Posts: 11,425
    it being the first film you saw and you having watched it a tonne of times does not make it a classic.

    i'd happily watch woody Harrelson and Bill Murray in king pin until the cows come home. doesn't make it a classic.

    actually may be it does.

    But GE definitely is not. it doesn't deserve to clean the boots of the Connery era. DAF included
  • edited June 2018 Posts: 11,189
    It's a classic in your own mind as its an important film and one that means a lot to you.

    I will admit that GE objectively is not as good as most of the Connery era, but it is a film I'm fond of as it played a huge part in my Bond fandom. The term "classic" is utterly subjective anyway. A lot of fans would call OP a classic but I know of other perfectly intelligent, sane people who call it dull, boring and one of the worst in the series.
  • edited June 2018 Posts: 11,425
    how is "classic" subjective? isn't it the definition of objective and widely accepted fact?

    FRWL is a classic. OP is highly entertaining twaddle. the fact I happen to love OP doesn't mean I think it's a classic.

    of course we can diverge from mainstream opinion and disagree on what is classic but over time it is hard to avoid the fact that some things just retain their appeal and continue to resonate.

    I have no doubt that GE was immensely popular with a certain (now ageing) demographic but do today's 15 year olds hold GE in such high regard? May be. frankly I don't know and probably care less. if they do then I feel sorry for them.
  • edited June 2018 Posts: 11,189
    Technically all the Bond films can be classed as "entertaining twaddle".

    A classic is defined as "judged over a period of time to be of the highest quality and outstanding of its kind" according to google.

    In this case I would say the early Connery films are almost universally regarded as classics of their kind. All the films since seem to be subject to personal opinion. Some regard them as classics, others don't.

    In nearly all cases nostalgia and how you viewed the film at the time of it's release seems to be a factor.
  • edited June 2018 Posts: 11,425
    I think you and Google are right.

    perhaps the only bona fide classic post Connery is TSWLM IMO.
  • Posts: 11,189
    Getafix wrote: »
    in think you and Google are right.

    perhaps the only bona fide classic post Connery is TSWLM IMO.

    I agree but there are people out there who don't like the film.
  • Posts: 11,425
    there's nowt as queer as folk
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,007
    We should try and cut out this pressing need to categorize those who view films differently than yourselves as insane or deluded. That's kind of how the subjectivity of film opinions works - it's subjective.

    I do agree that something being regarded as a classic isn't very subjective, but still, no need to berate others for how they feel.
  • Posts: 684
    Birdleson wrote: »
    I was not a fan of Brosnan when he was offered the role (I ended up liking him in GE; surprised), but let there be no doubt that the vibe and buzz surrounding his finally getting the part, the general excitement in the press and among the public, was huge in comparison to anything generated during the Dalton years.
    Or even the Craig years? Wasn't there a sort of common sentiment by U.S. critics at the time that Brosnan was clearly the best Bond since Connery? (I might just be thinking of Ebert, but I thought that was a throughline through much of the criticism.) I still feel like that attitude might prevail in certain ways. And it would make sense. I mean, the guy became a 'success' in the States. I feel like he's since become a sort of adopted national treasure. The style of his Bond films were the most overtly Hollywoodized to the point. Etc. He had the age range covered as well: the adult audience came to know him from Remington Steele, the younger audience came to know him from the video games. Timing was good, too, being Bond in the immediate period before digital downloads replaced looking forward to TNN debuting the last Bond, or when the majority surfed the channels for something to watch. I'm not sure Craig has ever managed to lodge himself in the public consciousness (in the States) to the same degree.
  • Posts: 12,514
    I would change almost nothing about GE. It was the perfect return the series needed after its long hiatus after LTK. Brosnan was a great choice for Bond, the Bond girls and villains were top form, the action scenes memorable and fun, and it struck a great balance of serious and silly. It’s a great template for modern Bond films. Anything I’d change about GE would be very minor. Even the score, while not the series’ best, is overhated and has some good moments.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited June 2018 Posts: 23,883
    GE is generally looked upon quite favourably by fans and critics alike today as far as I know. Does that classify it as a 'classic'? Who knows, but I believe that a lot of people, including scribes, see it along with CR & SF as the best Bond films of the last 30 odd years. Happily that sort of mirrors my own thoughts.
  • mattjoesmattjoes Pay more attention to your chef
    edited June 2018 Posts: 7,055
    bondjames wrote: »
    GE is generally looked upon quite favourably by fans and critics alike today as far as I know. Does that classify it as a 'classic'? Who knows, but I believe that a lot of people, including scribes, see it along with CR & SF as the best Bond films of the last 30 odd years. Happily that sort of mirrors my own thoughts.
    Precisely. Does that mean the whole world has gone nuts, and only those that dislike the film are sane? Of course not! And that is why using terms as 'insane', @Getafix, is out of place in a discussion about films, even if the term is (hopefully) not meant literally. It's not only something that demonstrates a lack of acceptance of the fact taste varies from person to person and is not an indicator of superiority; it's also a slippery slope that can lead to silly bickering.
  • edited June 2018 Posts: 11,425
    silly bickering... round here? whatever next?!
  • 00Agent00Agent Any man who drinks Dom Perignon '52 can't be all bad.
    edited June 2018 Posts: 5,185
    bondjames wrote: »
    GE is generally looked upon quite favourably by fans and critics alike today as far as I know. Does that classify it as a 'classic'? Who knows, but I believe that a lot of people, including scribes, see it along with CR & SF as the best Bond films of the last 30 odd years. Happily that sort of mirrors my own thoughts.

    +1 Goldeneye sure is a classic to me, it's my personal number 1 and even without nostalgia would easily make the top 5. And i have not seen any reason why i should change my mind on that. And i sure won't find any on this site.
    I know many people who agree with that. What is rather sad to me is, that so called Bond fans will trash the movie even though it brought a ton of new Bond fans into the series and consequently helped keep the series alive for years.
  • Posts: 15,218
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    bondsum wrote: »
    I totally agree @ToTheRight. This was indeed catalytic news at the time. Everything was pointing to Joel Silver being the new owner and producer of the James Bond series in '92. That's why I find it hard to swallow the hyperbole of Brosnan saving the series, considering that a new series of Bond movies almost happened under an entirely different leadership. Basically, a new Bond movie would've happened anyway and it would no doubt have had a far bigger budget than GE's and an A-list actor in the role to boot. Bond never did need saving, it just needed a total makeover and some more money injected into it. Even as far back as 1990 Richard Maibaum and John Glen said that they wouldn't be involved in Dalton's third Bond movie, and with Disney involved, changes were already underway long before the Pathe lawsuit became the fly in the ointment.

    I remember seeing an interview with Mel Gibson where he stated he wasn't really interested in playing Bond. I wonder if, had Joel Silver gotten the rights if he might have changed his mind?
    Interestingly during the Dalton era, a lot of people I knew felt Gibson would have been perfect to play Bond instead of Tim. He was even in the polls for GoldenEye along with Pierce, Liam, and Hugh Grant. I believe Pierce won those polls with ease.

    Just as Robbie Williams did later.

    It tells you something about popular demand.
  • Posts: 1,596
    Birdleson wrote: »
    How about we stop questioning each others' sanity when they have a different taste. We know where that kind of thing leads to and it gets messy.

    Thank you.

  • BMW_with_missilesBMW_with_missiles All the usual refinements.
    Posts: 3,000
    The only thing I would change about GE is I’d remove Xenia Onatopp and replace her with a less annoying, cringe-inducing character. In fact, that would probably move the film up at least one place in my rankings.
  • Posts: 2,919
    bondjames wrote: »
    GE is generally looked upon quite favourably by fans and critics alike today as far as I know. Does that classify it as a 'classic'?

    If one loosely defines a classic as a film that's more than a couple of decades old that's still fondly remembered by some, then sure. But that would apply to most of the Bond films, aside from the few films that are usually reviled (and even those have their defenders). GE was well-reviewed and well-received at the time for predictable reasons, but I don't know if its reputation has significantly risen since then. And the Brosnan era as a whole doesn't seem to have aged well in light of Craig's tenure.
    Who knows, but I believe that a lot of people, including scribes, see it along with CR & SF as the best Bond films of the last 30 odd years.

    Perhaps because of the weakness of the remaining competitors--Brosnan's subsequent films and Craig's other two films. As for Dalton's entries, fewer people have watched them, but those who have often place TLD in the best of the past three decades list.
  • Posts: 1,596
    I haven’t contributed to these threads because it’s very, very difficult for me to imagine how to “do things differently.” Even some of the elements we dislike are a part of a bigger film that most of us probably enjoy (at least I feel that way about the majority of the installments).

    It’s difficult to envision how the film changes when one element is tweaked. Tonally, so forth. Smallest changes can have huge impacts. Almost butterfly effect.

    That said, very interesting to see some of the suggestions. I agree with a few of @Birdleson’s. Strongly disagree regarding Xenia, as I think Famke’s performance is deliciously savage. She often feels like an amped up Fiona, unapologetically unhinged and sexually vicious. I think GE is one of the best examples of balancing/utilizing OTT elements and characters and not allowing them to careen out of control into pure camp (which also has its charm).
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,357
    Wouldn't change a thing. GE is a masterpiece.
  • 00Agent00Agent Any man who drinks Dom Perignon '52 can't be all bad.
    Posts: 5,185
    Murdock wrote: »
    Wouldn't change a thing. GE is a masterpiece.

    Sean-Connery-Fist-Pump-US-Open.gif?ssl=1
  • mattjoesmattjoes Pay more attention to your chef
    Posts: 7,055
    00Agent wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    Wouldn't change a thing. GE is a masterpiece.

    Sean-Connery-Fist-Pump-US-Open.gif?ssl=1
    Shtab him! Put that knife where it belongsh!

    ConneryCapCon
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,357
    00Agent wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    Wouldn't change a thing. GE is a masterpiece.

    Sean-Connery-Fist-Pump-US-Open.gif?ssl=1

    77qV.gif
  • edited June 2018 Posts: 12,514
    Birdleson wrote: »
    Over on the Originals thread (focusing on us that saw our first Bond film in the theatre or drive-in starring Connery or Lazenby upon or near initial release), a couple years back, we tried to come up with a definitive list (from a variety of criteria) of classic Bond films. It starts around page 199. We all had to give up something we loved and accept something we didn't personally feel an attachment to. I'm still uncomfortable excluding LIVE AND LET DIE.

    https://www.mi6community.com/discussion/3341/sirhenryleechachings-for-original-fans-put-a-previous-female-bond-villain-into-bond-25/p200

    Here is the final list:

    DR. NO
    FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE
    GOLDFINGER
    THUNDERBALL
    YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE
    ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE
    THE SPY WHO LOVED ME
    THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS
    GOLDENEYE
    CASINO ROYALE
    SKYFALL

    Overall that’s a great list of Top 11 most definitive Bond films. I think you could argue for LALD and FYEO as well. Not to say there aren’t other good Bond films, but those 13 are probably the best representation for what James Bond is all about.

  • Posts: 11,425
    I can deal with the list up to TLD but see it's inclusion as a bit daft. although I love TLD personally I'm not sure it can ever be described as a classic as so few outside a hard-core fan base have even seen it.

    nothing after TLD qualifies for me personally. I can see why CR is on there but it's not an easy rewatch for me - drags and is overlong
Sign In or Register to comment.