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
Surely this is true of FRWL, GF, TB, YOLT, and many, many others?
LTK for the Klebbie!
Only SP is rather weak, which surprises me because Kleinman usually delivers brilliant work.
Yeah it’s so frustrating. This is a film where his best friend nearly dies after his wedding, with a big evil drug dealer who rules a country and ships drugs in petroleum tankers and huge bundles of cash in submarines with manta rays and lizards and sharks and speedboats... and Binder couldn’t find anything to use in all that?! It’s called Licence To Kill: at the very least there’s some licence, official document etc. iconography to be exploited there surely?! Not bloody cameras and casinos!!
Folks are saying Spectre is bad, but st least it’s about that film: there’s a huge black many tentacled monster spread throughout it, Bond’s growing attachment to a mysterious woman, glimpses of his past being tied up in it, a shadowy network of many eyes watching him... Kleinmsn has actually thought about it and how it relates to the film, and that’s why LTK’s is a complete washout when you compare it if you ask me.
I'm going to go with SP, as Kleinman, though a good successor to Binder, has overstuffed his latest work on SF and SP after doing sterling work on CR!
QOS titles get a bad press, they are excellent!
I think the camera stuff is a little odd, but coming off the wedding scene, it's not crazy. It makes sense to me to have the titles connect with what came before and not necessarily the whole film. So the loads of skiers in the AVTAK titles are okay too.
I always thought he looked like his TLD self in that. Do you think it was an offcut from the previous one? He certainly features more in the TLD titles than the LTK ones.
Are there any photographers in that bit? I just had a look and couldn't spot any. It must be the first and only time one of the brand sponsors has got their logo front and centre in the credits though, before the title of the film, even!
:)
I agree about the skiers in AVTAK. I think the ski-dancing/acrobatics look rather great, in fact.
Look at this bit.
"Yeah just plonk 'em on the table, Brian. Yeah, next to the seven, looks a bit like 007, doesn't it? That'll do"
:D
And how the camera lens frames the gag of the bride's maids carrying in the parachutes. Love it!
Yeah they're pretty bad too. I like the lady who seems to be shooting her own reflection in the paddling pool (?) in TLD :)
Or is she shooting fish?
Binder was really quite hit and miss.
Yes that is nice. Those opening bars of the song hit well.
SP 7 votes
LTK 7 votes
AVTAK 2 votes
QOS 2 votes
So dear academy, if you had to choose which one is worst title sequence. SP or LTK?
Someone else mentioned the manta rays, Sanchez’ lizard, submarines, Latin elements, etc. There were so many elements that could’ve been used but, no, Polaroid film cameras and casinos...for reasons. Urrrgh.
I’d say his best of the 80s era was AVTAK. I hardly ever remember the title sequence for FYEO, OP was atrocious, and TLD was just...ok.
LTK I actually like.
Latin theme, yeah that's a really good point. There's plenty you could use there.
I tend to think cash would have been a good theme. The whole plot sort of hinges on Bond stealing that bundle of money; putting money into banks; accountants; Sanchez's millions going into payoffs etc. Banknotes and money seem more appropriate to this one than most Bond films.
I know what you mean about FYEO, I can't think of anything from it either. Apart from that unintentionally hilarious bit where the the abstract, out-of-focus background to one shot turns out to have been a really tight closeup on Sheena Easton's hair!
:D
Ditto!