"Dont blow it all at once ": Die Another Day Appreciation Thread

1343537394070

Comments

  • ThomasCrown76ThomasCrown76 Augusta, ks
    Posts: 757
    He was a good bond. Lee tamafooey was not right for bond
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    edited December 2014 Posts: 16,351
    He was a good bond. Lee tamafooey was not right for bond

    That we could all agree on. I wonder what DAD would have been like under Martin Campbell's direction...If only... 8->
  • Posts: 1,146
    I have always thought that the first hour is fantastic, but the second half is a total disaster, so I had an extrange feeling about this movie.

    Totally agree.
  • Posts: 1,146
    Getafix wrote: »
    Roger did the whole self parody thing while still doing really entertaining movies. Austin Powers was redundant because everything Rog ever did was a little tongue in cheek any way.

    Moore parodied Bond three decades before Meyers did.
  • Posts: 11,425
    Getafix wrote: »
    Roger did the whole self parody thing while still doing really entertaining movies. Austin Powers was redundant because everything Rog ever did was a little tongue in cheek any way.

    Moore parodied Bond three decades before Meyers did.

    True
  • Posts: 11,425
    I have always thought that the first hour is fantastic, but the second half is a total disaster, so I had an extrange feeling about this movie.

    Totally agree.

    Watched it last night and the first hour is as bad as the rest of it. Horrific script throughout - not sure anyone could have actually made it into a good movie. It feels like self parody but without the actual genuine humour of the Moore era.
  • Posts: 11,189
    The first half at least has more going for it than the second half. Namely colonel Moon Snr. and Roul.
  • Posts: 1,146
    Getafix wrote: »
    I have always thought that the first hour is fantastic, but the second half is a total disaster, so I had an extrange feeling about this movie.

    Totally agree.

    Watched it last night and the first hour is as bad as the rest of it. Horrific script throughout - not sure anyone could have actually made it into a good movie. It feels like self parody but without the actual genuine humour of the Moore era.

    Good relative to the Bros era. That film came out the same year as the first Bourne film, which shamed the EON people into mimicking them.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited December 2014 Posts: 9,117
    Getafix wrote: »
    I have always thought that the first hour is fantastic, but the second half is a total disaster, so I had an extrange feeling about this movie.

    Totally agree.

    Watched it last night and the first hour is as bad as the rest of it. Horrific script throughout - not sure anyone could have actually made it into a good movie. It feels like self parody but without the actual genuine humour of the Moore era.

    Good relative to the Bros era. That film came out the same year as the first Bourne film, which shamed the EON people into mimicking them.

    Yet DAD smashed Bourne at the box office so why were they worried?

    Strikes me they looked back and realised DAD was a total embarrassment and something had to change, but frankly some of the decisions made on DAD were so poor that in any other wall of life people would've paid with their job. Fortunately EON had a convenient scapegoat in Tamahori, which would be fine on a normal film but we all know how EON work and nothing gets signed off unless Babs and MGW agree with it so they are entirely culpable in my book. OK they have made amends since but I find it rather disconcerting that we have people in charge who ever thought an invisible car, a CGI tsunami and Jinx were good ideas.

    Maybe Tamahori is just a really good salesman at getting people to buy nto his shit ideas?

    The real victim here is Brozza - forced out of the job he loved (and was popular with the public) due to other people's cluelessness.
  • edited December 2014 Posts: 11,189
    I could be wrong but I remember Judi Dench defending Broz and criticising the way EON handled the whole mess.
  • Posts: 11,425
    EON and Tamahori must share the blame. Tamahori must take responsibility for the mainly abysmal acting throughout. There is barely a scene that isn't deeply embarrassing from an acting perspective.

    Strangely I found the whole film much more watchable (in a sort of car crash telly kind of way) than any of the other Brosnans. It's approaching that old 'so bad it's good' accolade.

    I feel sorry for Brozza as a bloke because he is a nice guy, but as a Bond fan it was all for the best that he step aside.
  • Posts: 11,189
    DAD could have been A LOT worse though according to the legend that Tamahori wanted to acknowledge the codename theory and have Sean Connery cameo alongside Brosnan.
  • Posts: 11,425
    Wow, now THAT would have been car crash TV.

    What do you think of the idea of having Sean play Kincade?
  • Posts: 11,189
    Not really a fan.

    If any of the Bond actors were to cameo it would have to be Lazenby.

    The others are too well known.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    Getafix wrote: »

    What do you think of the idea of having Sean play Kincade?

    Even though the head says no part of me thinks it would've been fantastic and a great nod to the 50th.

    But of course having everyone in the cinema shout out 'It's Sean Connery' in unison would take everyone out of the film and we'd all be expecting him to kick ass like in the Rock.
  • Posts: 3,327
    DAD is complete garbage, and an embarrassment to the franchise - well, also to movies in general really. I would rate it as one of the worst Hollywood budget movies ever made. Utter, gutter, shambles!!
  • I love the first hour of Die Another Day, but then, strange editing, the dodgy CGI, the Invisible Car, and gustav's robo-suit-controller thing. It really ruined it for me.

    Wish he could have just taken the parachute and jumped, rather than, tsunami surf on bad CGI!

    Good Soundtrack (minus Madonna)

    Best Scenes:
    PTS - (Really like the surfing)
    Medical Room Escape & Hotel Sequence
    Cuba
    The Fencing and Sword Fights.
    Bond and M in the Underground
    The Ice Palace
    Laser cutting the Ice, breaking into the fake mine, saving Jinx and Escaping from Moon
    The Car Chase (minus the scenes where it is invisible) It would have worked without.
    The Falco & M Debrief, with 007 & Jinx
    Bond and Jinx sneaking round the plane
    General Moon's plan and his Father trying to stop him.
    The Sword Fight on the Plane Jinx v Frost

    Bad Scenes:
    Anything Else!
  • Posts: 11,189
    I liked the surfing too, and Arnold's accompanying music.
  • ThomasCrown76ThomasCrown76 Augusta, ks
    Posts: 757
    Always amazed me that wade and purvis were brought back for bond 21
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited December 2014 Posts: 23,883
    From my perspective, DAD is a very entertaining 2+ hrs movie. I've always actually enjoyed watching it, but only as pure popcorn entertainment, along the Austin Powers line. As I've said before, my problem comes with calling it a James Bond movie or even thinking of it as one.....then one realizes it's taking the piss, even if unintentionally. Like those American ripoffs from the 60's (Our Man Flint etc.).

    So it can't be looked at seriously and it does not hold up to close scrutiny IMO.

    The producers (or perhaps the head honchos at Sony? - we now know that there was a guy at the top of Sony who insisted on Brozza over Dalton and who Babs did not like, so who knows what was going on during that period and who was actually in charge) obviously hadn't a clue when making this one or TWINE, and it shows on screen. Going through the motions, checking all the boxes and not giving a toss about acting at all (except for poor Pike, who's trying so hard in a movie that does not deserve her skills and who stands out like a sore thumb as a result). Brosnan isn't too bad in this one either, compared to his near tearful effort in TWINE (almost like he's trying to salvage his turn as Bond). Toby Stephens does ham better than Mike Myers. Halle Berry was obviously trying to show the world that the Oscar she received that year should be returned. I didn't like the score in this one (completely unmemorable), nor did I like TWINE's.

    The problem with the CGI surf is it is so disrespectful of the legacy of Bonds of old. Movies where they were so painstaking in creating an experience (with miniature models for the most part - tremendous attention to detail/craftmanship) that looked so realistic on screen. Anyone with half a brain would have rewritten this scene or scrapped it rather than include such garbage. It's inclusion is very telling of the stupidity and cluelessness involved at the highest levels when making this film. The same goes for the invincible Aston (while gadget laden cars were 'cool' in the 60's & 70's, it was obviously OTT by the 00's, and the fact that they couldn't see that is again a reflection of what was going on over there).

    I too was surprised that P&W were brought back for CR, along with Dench & Arnold (since they rebooted, they should have rebooted the entire tragic memory of that disappointing time IMO). For SP we only have P&W back (& only late in the day, so there's still hope) thank goodness.
  • ThomasCrown76ThomasCrown76 Augusta, ks
    Posts: 757
    That was what made me the most upset about casino royale when it was first announced. Brosnan gets the boot, but the writers get to stay??? That wasn't right.
  • Posts: 1,146
    Getafix wrote: »
    I have always thought that the first hour is fantastic, but the second half is a total disaster, so I had an extrange feeling about this movie.

    Totally agree.

    Watched it last night and the first hour is as bad as the rest of it. Horrific script throughout - not sure anyone could have actually made it into a good movie. It feels like self parody but without the actual genuine humour of the Moore era.

    Good relative to the Bros era. That film came out the same year as the first Bourne film, which shamed the EON people into mimicking them.

    Yet DAD smashed Bourne at the box office so why were they worried?

    Strikes me they looked back and realised DAD was a total embarrassment and something had to change, but frankly some of the decisions made on DAD were so poor that in any other wall of life people would've paid with their job. Fortunately EON had a convenient scapegoat in Tamahori, which would be fine on a normal film but we all know how EON work and nothing gets signed off unless Babs and MGW agree with it so they are entirely culpable in my book. OK they have made amends since but I find it rather disconcerting that we have people in charge who ever thought an invisible car, a CGI tsunami and Jinx were good ideas.

    Maybe Tamahori is just a really good salesman at getting people to buy nto his shit ideas?

    The real victim here is Brozza - forced out of the job he loved (and was popular with the public) due to other people's cluelessness.


    You're not going to seriously say that the Broz bonds were anywhere near as good as the Bourne films, are you?
    That's a joke. The Bourne films EMBARRASSED the Broz bonds, and EON simply began to copy their action scenes into their films.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited December 2014 Posts: 23,883
    I agree the Bourne films were quite definitive for their era. They changed how action thrillers are made. Like Bond did in the 60's and like Die Hard did in the late 80's (while a different style of movie, its pacing and fight sequencing/editing were picked up by Bond subsequently).

    When I first watched the Bourne Identity in the theatres, I was actually quite concerned for my beloved Bond franchise, because I realized how good the film I was watching was (the music, the tension, the pacing, the fights, the location photography etc. etc.). Here was how to do it, I thought. Here was how to keep it real in the 00's. I knew EON would try to do this with Bond....it's just that we had to wait 4 long years between BI in 2002 and CR in 2006 to get the revamped (thankfully) Bond universe.

    From my perspective, I didn't care if they rebooted or not. I just wanted a new actor as Bond (since PB had been tainted by that time IMO due to his involvement in the melodrama that was TWINE before and the DAD debacle after) and I wanted an attempt to get back to a more real universe rather than a fantastical, cliche driven one.

    EON delivered 4 yrs later with CR.
  • Posts: 1,146
    They totally did, and CR as well as SF are fantastic pictures with a tough, gritty Bond. I like QoS as well, but it's not as good as the first two, though I'd rather watch that film more than any of the Broz Bonds, even GE, which I like a lot. It's just got that gritty realistic feeling that even GE does not have.
  • Posts: 1,146
    Hopefully the days of the soft, suave, silly, pithy Bond are over.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    They totally did, and CR as well as SF are fantastic pictures with a tough, gritty Bond. I like QoS as well, but it's not as good as the first two, though I'd rather watch that film more than any of the Broz Bonds, even GE, which I like a lot. It's just got that gritty realistic feeling that even GE does not have.

    Bond films aren't realistic. What has been injected recently is an emotional core that is absent from a lot of other entries. Neither the novels, nor the films are particularly 'gritty' IMO, they just feel more tangible and less superfluous when there's some emotional jeopardy. It's why CR and OHMSS are two of the best in the canon. Having said that, the spectrum of tones across the films give the series it's identity and for every OHMSS, I'm glad there's a MR. Variety is the spice of life.
  • Posts: 11,189
    I've said before that Fleming himself described his books as "high flown, romanticised caricatures".
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    I've said before that Fleming himself described his books as "high flown, romanticised caricatures".

    Precisely.
  • Posts: 11,425
    RC7 wrote: »
    They totally did, and CR as well as SF are fantastic pictures with a tough, gritty Bond. I like QoS as well, but it's not as good as the first two, though I'd rather watch that film more than any of the Broz Bonds, even GE, which I like a lot. It's just got that gritty realistic feeling that even GE does not have.

    Bond films aren't realistic. What has been injected recently is an emotional core that is absent from a lot of other entries. Neither the novels, nor the films are particularly 'gritty' IMO, they just feel more tangible and less superfluous when there's some emotional jeopardy. It's why CR and OHMSS are two of the best in the canon. Having said that, the spectrum of tones across the films give the series it's identity and for every OHMSS, I'm glad there's a MR. Variety is the spice of life.

    true. not sure why people obsess over the realism and grittyness so much - Bond is notorious for its unrealisitc portrayal of espionage. John Le Carre used to find it reallly annoying that Bond was so successful as he regarded the books and films as total nonsense. he needed to get a sense of humour and realise he was missing the point - Bond is escapist fantasy, with touches of realism, sex and danger. Bourne definitley showed up the dross that EON were making during the Brosnan era but Bond is not really going after quite the same market. it's a unique fantasy world -one of its defining features is actually how detached it is from true reality.

    i love classic Bond and I really liked the first three Bourne films, but for very different reasons.
  • Posts: 11,189
    Bond is nonsense really. But it's entertaining nonsense.

    It was certainly a wise move to get more class back into Bond in 2006 and get at least get a bit of reality again.

    I remember Martin Campbell saying that in an interview:

    "Make it leaner and meaner but at the same time keep the stuff that's great about Bond"
Sign In or Register to comment.