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
Not a fan then? ;)
Yeah, I don't particularly understand the hate for QoS either. When I first watched it, I was a little disappointed because it ended too quickly and the action was confusing due to the terrible camera editing. Nonetheless, it is starting to grow on me as I watch it more times. It has great location work, probably its best quality, great action if you can really squint hard and pay attention. Actually, the editing is good during the plane dogfight and the hand-to-hand battle with Slate, so those two are more bearable. Also, I liked Daniel Craig's performance. He seemed more professional and less headstrong, like in CR where he acted like an angry rookie. I love CR, don't get me wrong, but in some scenes he acted a little out of character.
Despite it's faults I must admit I've always preferred TWINE.
Interesting selection that. I'd say my ranking goes like this:
<center>TND</center>
<center>over</center>
<center>QOS</center>
<center>over</center>
<center>DAD</center>
<center>over</center>
<center>TWINE</center>
TWINE over QoS over TND over DAD.
None are great films however.
Unoriginal? In the world of Bond, no, it's quite unique. Maybe for the wrong reasons but there you go. It's all about style.
Slow? More like, fast, fast, fast! In fact too fast for it's own good. Gives you no time to breath.
Boring - I'll give you that. The plot wasn't up to much or more likely was just presented in the completely wrong way, in order to work.
Well, onward to the next round:
Dr. No vs. License to Kill
LTK
LTK is my second favorite of the two Bonds that Dalton did, it's OK admittedly, but at times it doesn't feel like a Bond movie, Dalton is restricted to one or two locations during running time, same as with Connery in 1962, fair enough, but LTK just drags on sometimes and it's more adult fare than for kids, and just brought Bond of the time out of it's comfort zone. I have to choose Doctor No, if I had a choice right now of the two, I'd put it on and have a watch and go back to where it all began
Overall, it beats Dr. No on its large group of great villains, much better action, a better score, and a better storyline/plot. As for Bond's performance, both DN and LTK feature wonderful performances by Connery and Dalton, in fact, some of their finest Bond work.
4. Dr. No (1962) - 9/10
5. On Her Majesty’s Secret Service (1969) - 9/10
6. Thunderball (1965) - 8.5/10
7. The Living Daylights (1987) - 8.5/10
8. GoldenEye (1995) - 8/10
9. You Only Live Twice (1967) - 7.5/10
10. License to Kill (1989) - 7.5/10
Re your comment about LTK being "more adult fare than for kids". I once saw an article in a Men's health magazine that listed 100 movies for men and DR NO was the only Bond movie to make the list. LTK is considered the most violent of the Bonds but I still enjoy it and it sounds like you also enjoyed it. Can't have all the Bonds being the same movie. Bond movies despite being formulaic still should be unique.
WHY LTK simple dark brooding my Second Favorite Bond (Craig Beats Dalton by a hair) great climax some amazing moments it's just an amazing film
It's just that it seemed at the time and maybe in retrospect a bit out of line with it's predecessors. There we were from 1962 onwards, with our Parental Guidance classifications and for the most part nothing too extreme, I mean just four years before LTK we had Moore putting on some 007 fare some five year olds would enjoy, and then like all of a sudden, it all got a bit nefarious and from the comfort of Bond in gorilla suits and clown 'fits, we were introduced to sharks biting off limbs, exploding heads, and guys impaled on Fork Lifts etc, it was such a rise in content in such short time. Not that I have a problem with it, but there you are. I remember at the time when it was released in Summer '89 they gave it a '15' certificate and I was thinking 'what's all that about', it's not something we expected with James Bond, at least at the time
Octopussy: 19
Quantum of Solace: 2
:))
Licence To Kill, in my opinion, doesn't have the sparkle, the glamour, or the fun, that I associate with a good Bond film. Dr No started it all. There really is no contest in my eyes.
I'd rather be underneath the mango tree with Sir Sean, Ursula and Quarrel, than in the grim, gritty world of Licence To Kill.
Thats why I love it.
I also like Dr No, Doctor Julius No is my favourite literary Fleming figure and Ursula is very iconic.
But LTK has an almost Shakespearian plot where 007 uses the villains paranoia against him and that tanker chase is a magnificent climax.