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
Overall, I like this movie: Elektra is an incredible character, centering the plot around geopolitical issues such as the transport of hydrocarbons from Central Asia to Europe is a very good idea, while being interested in the former Soviet bloc countries and their early years of independence, while bringing back the character of Valentin Zukovsky makes it a good spiritual sequel to GoldenEye.
Regarding the locations, I would undoubtedly have enjoyed seeing more of these countries. With the exception of Turkey with Istanbul, the other countries are only represented through their natural landscapes and I would happily have liked to see more of Baku, like GoldenEye did with Petersburg.
Perhaps this is controversial, but I can accept Christmas Jones as she is in the context of the film. I think something about Denise Richard's comparative awkwardness as an actress makes her more human and oddly sincere in comparison to Elektra, who increasingly becomes harder to read as a character (and to Bond) at that point in the film. Maybe I just haven't watched TWINE in a while and don't remember how bad the performance is though! It's kind of interesting seeing Bond fall for Elektra - who is essentially a sort of evil version of Tracy, very mysterious and damaged - only for her to betray him and have Bond end up with a character who is seemingly an ordinary person (albeit an ordinary person who is a nuclear scientist). She's not the love of Bond's life, she's not damaged or mysterious, but she's reliable, straightforward, and helps Bond. The antithesis of Elektra I suppose.
And yes, completely agreed about Renard. He should honestly be one of the best villains of the series. I love the idea of an anarchist given a terminal diagnosis and as a result is hell bent on destroying the world. It's actually quite a scary concept.
I would say Renard for me is a missed opportunity for the movie and for that it effects the movie in a negative way.
Carlyle's a great character actor, but he gives off more of a 'lonely weirdo' vibe than charismatic anarchist. As stated before I can't buy him and Brosnan going head to head in a fight. He's also the sort of character who I think would work better as a twisted mirror image of Bond - more a Silva or Alec Travelyan. Like Bond he does what he does for the thrills, only instead of skewing towards order he relishes in chaos and destruction. While he's technically at his physical peak, like Bond he has an injury in the form of a bullet in his head that'll kill him. There could have been such great parallels there. A Bond who is injured and pushing himself too much facing a man whose injury forces him to push himself as well, only to greater effect, is brilliant. It may well have added more to the Elektra dynamic of the film too. It's much more interesting seeing Elektra manipulate a mirror image of Bond. We could have had a proper interaction during the final fight with Bond trying to get inside Renard's head/keep him off balance. He could have taunted him, saying that Elektra was playing him and that he's nothing more than her lap dog. I dunno, Renard could have gone into a frenzy, broken his arm/incapacitated himself in some way so that he was slowed down/Bond has a chance to kill him.
God this film could have been so good. Seriously, what happened with it?
Denise Richards was miscast though, it's not that she's bad, but the character was out of her mantra, it's like seeing Talisa Soto plays an Engineer or Politician or something like that, that's how unbelievable she was.
Denise Richards could've been given a better character that could play to her strengths in a Bond film, she's a Bond Girl material for sure, and she could act better than the likes of Barbara Bach, Claudine Auger or Carole Bouquet, but the character itself was badly written: why to have her wear a Lara Croft outfit in a field? That's not appropriate, and she's acting more like a College student than a Professional.
I understand Christmas Jones' role as a Scientist, but she could've been written better and get an actress that's matched for the part, and her role also stripped off the relevance, because she's not needed at all in the third act, her scenes should be in that Nuclear Testing site, but she went beyond there because Bond dragged her with him to the point where she's also there in the Tower in Baku and she did no help in the submarine either other than to blab her lines about Nuclear Physics which Bond didn't seemed to care.
She's a missed opportunity, because she could've been a good character, ruined by bad writing and miscasting.
Well, I’d say the character’s not meant to be overly deep. Like I said she’s basically the antithesis of Elektra. Not to say such a character can’t be more interesting, nor that Richards isn’t miscast or that the character couldn’t have been stronger.
Dependent on alternative writing ideas there’s probably a missed opportunity in there, sure. I personally don’t know what that’d be (bad writing isn’t a missed opportunity, just poor choices). I don’t know who else was considered for the role in the same way Bardem and Reno were for Renard so can’t say if a better actress was in the cards.
Renard may or may not have been miscast, bit it starts with the writing for me, or lack of. They give him a great background, but never develop it beyond the briefing.
"The lift's broken."
"I'm counting on you to give me information, so don't let me down. Wait-- You know what I mean!"
"How is it now?"
"It's slightly stiff."
"It was quite a fall."
"I'm still...falling."
(a nod to "a slight stiffness in the shoulder, due to the altitude no doubt.")
"Always have an escape plan." (Bond gives a final tribute to Desmond's Q just before they ride the elevator to the surface or escape the pipeline bomb)
"We(eeeeee!) need to get out of here!"
"Is Bond defeating them?"
"He's getting into the swing of it."
I especially like the nod to Q and the having an escape plan.
I have heard from several different sources that Denise doesn't look fondly on her experience in this movie. Some say Apted was a bit of an arse with her and she felt alone and without direction. I don't have a problem with her in the role per se but the role is bland. Nothing memorable about her. I do like when her and Bond are standing over Valentin in the caviar factory. Too bad that she was and is vilified for the role, as they say you can only work with what you are given and it would appear she wasn't given a lot.
I told my dad that I enjoyed TWINE. His response was that it was one of his least favorites, and that there were better Bond movies. He was right, and it wasn’t a generation thing. I’m a bit biased towards TWINE as it was my first Bond movie I saw. It’s similar to Carte Blanche, it was my first Bond book. I do however get fan’s frustrations with them both. Some story elements and characterizations that don’t feel like James Bond, namely. But I stand by them both, for more than one reason. Namely spoilers: female villains.
I do feel like TWINE has some great ideas, and Denise Richards was truly in a no win situation. The writing of the movie is why I enjoy the Raymond Benson novelization of it more than the final movie, same with TND. I think this review can best shape its uniqueness in Bond history: Pete Debruge of Variety wrote in 2012 that "[The World Is Not Enough] presents a conflicted persona torn between the corny antics of the Roger Moore era and the grim seriousness of where things would eventually go under Daniel Craig’s tenure. It also contains a dose of Timothy Dalton-esque toughness [...] Much of what made Brosnan such a great Bond is thrust into the backseat by lame jokes and a premature attempt to mix up the formula", concluding that it was "nothing but a reversion to the franchise's most adolescent tendencies".
Similar to another 1999 movie character, Jar Jar Binks, I feel fans were a bit hard on Denise and her character. The most memorable things about her for me are her name, her tank top and her bellybutton tattoo. One thing that I don’t like about TWINE was it pushed M to the front. It’s getting old, the writing for M to been sympathetic has been poor. I don’t like how EON thinks that they should be a mentor figure to Bond, when all they do criticize him for his actions. This arguably started in TWINE. The best thing about TWINE is the N64 game, which in some ways I like better than GE, and the original movie. All in all, TWINE misses a lot of great opportunities, but EON learned their lessons from it, to give us better movies. A movie ahead of it’s time, in some ways.
It was the 40th anniversary of Bond in cinema and the producers went BIG. Casting an Oscar winning actress as the Bond girl, though she hadn't won the Oscar when cast. It was a big deal to get Halle Berry. The plot was large scale and took inspiration from previous films. We have some science-fact (as Cubby would say) and some fantasy elements. Cars can be invisible, satellites can destroy earth with lasers from diamonds. The creative team decided to have call backs to previous films scattered through-out. Of course we had a new Q as Desmond had sadly passed after TWINE.
Lots going on with this film, including Bond joining the ranks of the cinematic world and introducing some CGI.
So with all this going on, I have to ask....
What were the missed opportunities with Die Another Day?
I feel the need to be really clear this isn't about the flaws of the film. We are looking at what plot elements could have been better, what story lines or character arcs were not explored. Were their casting choices that were missed?
Lets have a discussion about a film that seems to be the whipping boy for many, but has some redeeming features in it!
But even then, I think the bigger issue with this film is not leaning into the promise of the concept. Bond being captured, tortured for months, and then released/forced to go against MI6 (who believe he’s given away secrets) in order to figure out who betrayed him has so much promise. I understand it was the 40th Anniversary film so they likely went into it with the idea that this film needed to be a ‘crowd pleaser’ (which kinda devolves into outlandishness here) but if they’d just ran a bit more with that premise and tried to tone down the silliness (ie. Bond making his heart stop) then we could have at least gotten a better first half. We could have seen a Bond genuinely on his own for maybe the entire film, with MI6 trying to track him (along the lines of LTK or QOS).
Maybe some hypothetical missed opportunities - the latter half of the film is kinda a mixture of the MR novel and DAF film. If they were using the latter as inspiration, why not make Gustav Graves a sort of Willard Whyte figure who’s being held captive by Moon? Could have been a good twist, and it would have avoided the silliness of the gene therapy stuff (or at least toned it down somewhat - not sure if even Bondian suspension of disbelief makes me believe that Stephens is actually a Korean Colonel). If they still wanted to lean into the gene therapy stuff why not just use that as the main plot? The idea of replacing influential people with what are essentially ‘clones’ is far more chilling than a CGI laser.
Not doing more with Raoul? I actually think a sleeper agent is such an interesting idea for a Bond ally.
I know the original plan was to include Gala Brand and have Jinx be the traitor. A bit derivative of Elektra perhaps, but that could have been cool/have leaned into the premise of Bond not fully knowing who to trust.
But what enrages me the most are the opportunities they took and they should have not even touched: the over reliance on science fiction, the heavy, heavy, heavy deus ex machina gadgetry, the Bond's equal with Jinx, the...
Okay, I'll mention one for now: the title. The Italian title was "Death Can Wait" and it is far better. A great title in fact. But far too good for what DAD is, come to think of it.
Most titles are better than Die Another Day. I would have honestly gone with Beyond the Ice.
It’s ok for a Bond title. It does sound a bit repetitive, coming so soon after Tomorrow Never Dies. I think some people think that all Bond titles are death, kill or die. It’s a bit of a Bond stereotype.
2. Lee Tamahori was ok but If they wanted a flashy director they should have hired John Woo.
Good post. I wish they had picked one inspiration of the three: DAF or MR novel or maybe forget all of that and go with the Bond imprisoned and released storyline (for once, with justifiable trust issues from M).
The script is actually (gasp!) good...until they start getting bogged down with ticking all of Bond's greatest hits, around the time they start filming Bond in Hong Kong. Then when Graves parachutes in with the Union Jack it has started to go off the rails.
One good missed opportunity is not wasting Gala Brand on this film.
Not me. I think it's better than LTK, but that's about it. When I heard it, I started having that nagging feeling that the film might not be as good as the other Brosnan ones (I thought his era was great at the time).
There take the editor of Mi2 and Spy Game as editor, whyle Stuard Baid was ask to be Mi2 second editor /corrected Christian Wagner work. So in this case mabey Spy Game be more the reasen. There correct this and Stuard Baid be editor for CR but Sony created that he was not avaible for QOS because he working at Vantage Point (a bit simalar looking movie). Correct again with SF Baid returns. Tony Scott was considered as directer for QOS (a possible another reasen why actor playing Mathis was cast already for CR because he was seen in Man Of Fire).
Funny enough there not cinematographer of Spy Game or Mission Impossible 2 but David Tattersall who works on Vertical Limited and later on Tomb Raider 2. But mabey Wagner as editor was enough to let him partly using filter over Tattersall Spy Game look scenes. Tattersal is big fan of dark blue sharp filters very clear at beginning. And not big fan of to Sharp blue in Tomb Raider 2. Die Another Day was stil filmed on film this save movie for worse. Not fan of the scenes on Cuba. Moost known i iam not be big fan of Skyfall cinematophy in the cinema and have better experience on analoge tv. Possible because of digital filming and cold look.
With 6-7 views of Die Another Day i stil think scene with Jinx almoost died under the ice should have been cut and laser scene. No Falco, no Airplane scene. It shame Michael Kitchen is not in the movie and should have stand next to M. Moneypenny is a shame and Charles are wasted a bit. Brosnan should have done 5th movie.
In The Netherlands movie was delayed till 09 January 2003, so it was never 2002 for me so easily to say i think there should delay movie in general to October 2003 or so in earlier stage when Halle Barry said no to be a villian. Producers be to exited about Halle Barry and Madonna. Have time to consider another final scene too.
Either that or save all these great ideas for the Craig era were they'd have been utilised better probably, particularly Rosamund Pike
The North Korea angle was under-used for sure and could have started us on a darker tone of the film. I thought it was almost Fleming-esque. The stinging and then giving the anti-venom was genius. The female torturer was strong in her mostly non-verbal role.
I love the key and the whole subway scene between M and Bond is terrific and a rather nice set up. But I don't think it ever really pays off. M goes from being angry with Bond to suddenly welcoming him back with open arms. Perhaps if that had dragged out a bit it would have added to the drama of the movie.
Dont think so!
DAD and CR are worlds apart in terms of quality!
Its no surprise that DAD still remains bottom of most peoples lists!
That said I think the majority of people prefer CR.