Controversial opinions about Bond films

1175176178180181707

Comments

  • Posts: 15,229
    I edited my comment. He was competent... But he excelled at desk work, ultimately.
  • Posts: 16,223
    Bit late to this debate but hey ho..

    I really love Never Say Never Again...!

    So many great moments and performances in it.

    Big Sean, Brandeur and Carrera are excellent in it.

    The only downside is the awful score and a weak climax.

    I love NSNA as well, but your post leads me to possibly my best controversial opinion.
    As weak as the climax for NSNA was, it's no weaker than many of endings to, say, the post Dalton Bonds. I particular find the climaxes to TWINE, DAD, dare I say, CR and QoS to be on the same level.
  • ToTheRight wrote: »
    Bit late to this debate but hey ho..

    I really love Never Say Never Again...!

    So many great moments and performances in it.

    Big Sean, Brandeur and Carrera are excellent in it.

    The only downside is the awful score and a weak climax.

    I love NSNA as well, but your post leads me to possibly my best controversial opinion.
    As weak as the climax for NSNA was, it's no weaker than many of endings to, say, the post Dalton Bonds. I particular find the climaxes to TWINE, DAD, dare I say, CR and QoS to be on the same level.

    A lot of Bonds are anticlimactic, I even started a thread on it a while ago...
    http://www.mi6community.com/index.php?p=/discussion/14855/why-are-so-many-bond-films-anticlimactic#latest
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    edited April 2016 Posts: 7,207
    It seems to me that most people love TLD but don't like Whitaker/Koskov.

    I'd say both make great villains. Jeroen Krabbé is as slimy as he is charismatic ("Duty has no sweethearts"), Joe Don Baker's obnoxious, brutish Whitaker reminds me a lot of Fleming's Scaramanga. Also that pantheon of dictators and his own personal war room is a nice addition.

    I might also add that there has never been a line-up of so many great allies than in TLD; Saunders, Pushkin, Shah are all top 10 or 15 material in the ally department I'd say.
  • Posts: 15,229
    Jeroen Krabbe is a great actor but Koskov was played too much like a joke. He could have been a great villain had they written him more like say Hugo Drax in MR. The friend that has the manners of a foe, coldly amiable. Never saw Whitaker remotely as Scaramanga.
  • edited April 2016 Posts: 337
    Neither Koskov nor Whitaker had any sort of menace whatsoever. Scaramanga was far more suave and threatening than Whitaker - there's not even a comparison in my opinion. Whitaker was the flattest and most cardboard villain in the history of Bond cinema.
  • MayDayDiVicenzoMayDayDiVicenzo Here and there
    Posts: 5,080
    @GoldenGun was referring to the Scaramanga of the novel, of which I agree there are similarities.
  • GoldenGun wrote: »
    It seems to me that most people love TLD but don't like Whitaker/Koskov.

    I'd say both make great villains. Jeroen Krabbé is as slimy as he is charismatic ("Duty has no sweethearts"), Joe Don Baker's obnoxious, brutish Whitaker reminds me a lot of Fleming's Scaramanga. Also that pantheon of dictators and his own personal war room is a nice addition.

    I might also add that there has never been a line-up of so many great allies than in TLD; Saunders, Pushkin, Shah are all top 10 or 15 material in the ally department I'd say.

    I also think the villains have a sort of charm about them. They are both rather amusing. It is fine if they don't have much menace; if all villains were menacing it would get boring. Koskov is great.
  • Posts: 15,229
    They are villains in a spy thriller they should be menacing. Not the same way but menacing. Unthreatening villains are pretty much pointless. Everything works in TLD but them. They are set up as deadly efficient and ruthless in the PTS they end up petty schemers. I'm not the biggest fan of LTK but the villain was suitably menacing.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited April 2016 Posts: 23,883
    I agree. Whittaker is the weakest part in TLD. Koskov is humorous (which may have been the point) so I am ok with him but Whittaker is absolutely useless.

    What's more disappointing is that this was coming out of EON's stables when Hollywood was giving us classic villains like Arjen Rudd in Lethal Weapon 2 & of course the legendary Hans Gruber in Die Hard.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Bit late to this debate but hey ho..

    I really love Never Say Never Again...!

    So many great moments and performances in it.

    Big Sean, Brandeur and Carrera are excellent in it.

    The only downside is the awful score and a weak climax.

    I love NSNA as well, but your post leads me to possibly my best controversial opinion.
    As weak as the climax for NSNA was, it's no weaker than many of endings to, say, the post Dalton Bonds. I particular find the climaxes to TWINE, DAD, dare I say, CR and QoS to be on the same level.

    Vesper dying on the same level as an appallingly dull tussle between two blokes in an underwater cave with pretty much nothing at stake?

    This is more than controversial - it's quite simply wrong.
    bondjames wrote: »
    I agree. Whittaker is the weakest part in TLD. Koskov is humorous (which may have been the point) so I am ok with him but Whittaker is absolutely useless.

    What's more disappointing is that this was coming out of EON's stables when Hollywood was giving us classic villains like Arjen Rudd in Lethal Weapon 2 & of course the legendary Hans Gruber in Die Hard.

    Spot on in every regard. Airbrush Whitaker out of TLD and what do you lose? A fat brash American (I realise that's tautology) eating a lobster is all as far as I can tell.
  • Posts: 15,229
    bondjames wrote: »
    I agree. Whittaker is the weakest part in TLD. Koskov is humorous (which may have been the point) so I am ok with him but Whittaker is absolutely useless.

    What's more disappointing is that this was coming out of EON's stables when Hollywood was giving us classic villains like Arjen Rudd in Lethal Weapon 2 & of course the legendary Hans Gruber in Die Hard.

    I am ok, heck I am very happy, with the casting of Koskov, but not with the way he was written. He is less of a buffoon as the movie goes on, but he was depicted as far too weak and comedic at first, to the character's detriment. Imagine Hans Gruber starting Die Hard saying he is scared of heights or something like that.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Ludovico wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I agree. Whittaker is the weakest part in TLD. Koskov is humorous (which may have been the point) so I am ok with him but Whittaker is absolutely useless.

    What's more disappointing is that this was coming out of EON's stables when Hollywood was giving us classic villains like Arjen Rudd in Lethal Weapon 2 & of course the legendary Hans Gruber in Die Hard.

    I am ok, heck I am very happy, with the casting of Koskov, but not with the way he was written. He is less of a buffoon as the movie goes on, but he was depicted as far too weak and comedic at first, to the character's detriment. Imagine Hans Gruber starting Die Hard saying he is scared of heights or something like that.
    I agree, but that may have been the point, because he was trying to ingratiate himself with the British to defect. It may have been part of the act to suggest a weakling. Only in Afghanistan, after Bond is captured, does he show his real self to Bond.

    Keep in mind Gruber did exactly the same thing as Bill Clay. "No, you're one of them aren't you......Noooo you're one of them!"
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,723
    Character wise, there's been plenty of fantastic villains in the Bond franchise. However, performance wise, Alan Rickman in 'Die Hard' blows most of them out of the water.
  • Posts: 1,631
    bondjames wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I agree. Whittaker is the weakest part in TLD. Koskov is humorous (which may have been the point) so I am ok with him but Whittaker is absolutely useless.

    What's more disappointing is that this was coming out of EON's stables when Hollywood was giving us classic villains like Arjen Rudd in Lethal Weapon 2 & of course the legendary Hans Gruber in Die Hard.

    I am ok, heck I am very happy, with the casting of Koskov, but not with the way he was written. He is less of a buffoon as the movie goes on, but he was depicted as far too weak and comedic at first, to the character's detriment. Imagine Hans Gruber starting Die Hard saying he is scared of heights or something like that.
    I agree, but that may have been the point, because he was trying to ingratiate himself with the British to defect. It may have been part of the act to suggest a weakling. Only in Afghanistan, after Bond is captured, does he show his real self to Bond.

    Keep in mind Gruber did exactly the same thing as Bill Clay. "No, you're one of them aren't you......Noooo you're one of them!"

    I think it was intentional. The idea was to set Koskov up as this innocent guy needing to escape from Pushkin to the welcome arms of the West. Koskov put up that front in order to try to paint Pushkin as the villain, which MI6 fall for.
  • edited April 2016 Posts: 11,189
    I don't like the way Koskov says: "I told you the British believed me...I told you...I told you" when he's with Whitiker and Necros. He sounds like his favourite football team have just scored.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,827
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    I don't like the way Koskov says: "I told you the British believed me...I told you...I told you" when he's with Whitiker and Necros. He sounds like his favourite football team have just scored.
    He nailed it. He's a petty jerk.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    edited April 2016 Posts: 41,011
    Spot on in every regard. Airbrush Whitaker out of TLD and what do you lose? A fat brash American (I realise that's tautology) eating a lobster is all as far as I can tell.

    I initially thought "Oh, look, yet another dig at America, what a surprise," only to dwell on it for a few moments and realize there aren't many better ways to describe the people here than fat and loud, so well played.

    @BAIN123, I'm with you there, that line delivery by Koskov has always bothered me, seems childish and overly giddy, and only assists in me not finding him to be threatening or hostile in the slightest.
  • Posts: 15,229
    bondjames wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I agree. Whittaker is the weakest part in TLD. Koskov is humorous (which may have been the point) so I am ok with him but Whittaker is absolutely useless.

    What's more disappointing is that this was coming out of EON's stables when Hollywood was giving us classic villains like Arjen Rudd in Lethal Weapon 2 & of course the legendary Hans Gruber in Die Hard.

    I am ok, heck I am very happy, with the casting of Koskov, but not with the way he was written. He is less of a buffoon as the movie goes on, but he was depicted as far too weak and comedic at first, to the character's detriment. Imagine Hans Gruber starting Die Hard saying he is scared of heights or something like that.
    I agree, but that may have been the point, because he was trying to ingratiate himself with the British to defect. It may have been part of the act to suggest a weakling. Only in Afghanistan, after Bond is captured, does he show his real self to Bond.

    Keep in mind Gruber did exactly the same thing as Bill Clay. "No, you're one of them aren't you......Noooo you're one of them!"

    They could have done so without having Koskov come off as weak from the beginning. More in control than he looked. And at least less of a clown. Gruber did the same thing... But far longer into the movie, when he had already been established as a cool and ruthless terrorist. The audience is in on his Bill Clay impersonation, they know who he truly is, thus making the charade far more efficient and far scarier. Not to mention suspenseful. They know it is just a facade that will simply fall down when the hero has put his guard down.

    In fiction, many villains first take an amicable guise. King Claudius, Count Dracula, Long John Silver, O'Brien, to name a few. Koskov should have been more like them, affable yet very much in control. When the mask drops, it does not come so much as a surprise as something you had been feeling all along.
  • I think it is fine to make one of two main villains humourous. So Koskov is fine. But then logically shouldn't the other be menacing? They should have made Whitaker more of a menace to balance it out. Necros is the only one in the trio who poses a real threat to Bond.
  • Birdleson wrote: »
    I think it is fine to make one of two main villains humourous. So Koskov is fine. But then logically shouldn't the other be menacing? They should have made Whitaker more of a menace to balance it out. Necros is the only one in the trio who poses a real threat to Bond.

    I am fine with the duo as the main villains, they fit the film/plot/tempo. I just wish the last third of the film had been completely reworked. Nothing against the villains.

    The only thing I might change in TLD is doing over the final confrontation with Whitaker. I very much appreciate the entire plane sequence in TLD, I think it's great.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Waltz in Spectre reminds me of Krabbe in The Living Daylights in a few scenes.
  • edited April 2016 Posts: 11,189
    Waltz in Spectre reminds me of Krabbe in The Living Daylights in a few scenes.

    I get what you mean. Very chirpy.

    Another thing I've wondered about Koskov: was his "don't kill me...don't kill me" plea to Necros in the safe-house meant to be unconvincing (as we find out he's working with them later) or not?
  • Posts: 15,229
    I think it is fine to make one of two main villains humourous. So Koskov is fine. But then logically shouldn't the other be menacing? They should have made Whitaker more of a menace to balance it out. Necros is the only one in the trio who poses a real threat to Bond.

    The thing is Krabbé is a far better actor than Baker. And he looks far more menacing too. See him in Farinelli as Handel. He played a classical composer with all the presence and menace of a Bond villain of old!
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Bit late to this debate but hey ho..

    I really love Never Say Never Again...!

    So many great moments and performances in it.

    Big Sean, Brandeur and Carrera are excellent in it.

    The only downside is the awful score and a weak climax.

    I love NSNA as well, but your post leads me to possibly my best controversial opinion.
    As weak as the climax for NSNA was, it's no weaker than many of endings to, say, the post Dalton Bonds. I particular find the climaxes to TWINE, DAD, dare I say, CR and QoS to be on the same level.

    I like NSNA too!
  • edited April 2016 Posts: 11,189
    The last couple of times I've watched it, I have to say I'm not too fond of the romantic LTK ending. Obvious winking fish aside, it just feels really soppy and cheesy with Pam running off crying and Dalton jumping into the pool.

    The best bit is the look Q gives as he sips his drink and goes back to the party.
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    edited April 2016 Posts: 7,207
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    The last couple of times I've watched it, I have to say I'm not too fond of the romantic LTK ending. Obvious winking fish aside, it just feels really soppy and cheesy with Pam running off crying and Dalton jumping into the pool.

    The best bit is the look Q gives as he sips his drink and goes back to the party.

    LTK is a child of its time. Full 80's mode there. I love it.
  • edited April 2016 Posts: 337
    LTK feels split between a generic, gritty 80's action movie and Bond. Less on the Moore-side than TLD, but still some leftovers from that era.

    This might be a bit controversial - I didn't really feel much when Dalton discovered the Leiters being maimed/murdered. There just wasn't any sense of emotional rush or desire for revenge as with Saunder's death in TLD.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 4,078
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Bit late to this debate but hey ho..

    I really love Never Say Never Again...!

    So many great moments and performances in it.

    Big Sean, Brandeur and Carrera are excellent in it.

    The only downside is the awful score and a weak climax.

    I love NSNA as well, but your post leads me to possibly my best controversial opinion.
    As weak as the climax for NSNA was, it's no weaker than many of endings to, say, the post Dalton Bonds. I particular find the climaxes to TWINE, DAD, dare I say, CR and QoS to be on the same level.

    I'd say the LALD climax was pretty lame, not sure about the others. Definitely not CS or QoS. Loved both their climaxes.

    I think for NSNA it needed something a little more explosive and spectacular.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 4,078
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    The last couple of times I've watched it, I have to say I'm not too fond of the romantic LTK ending. Obvious winking fish aside, it just feels really soppy and cheesy with Pam running off crying and Dalton jumping into the pool.

    The best bit is the look Q gives as he sips his drink and goes back to the party.

    That ending almost made me vomit!

    After the grim bloody revenge story we've just sat through it really is jarring!

    As for that stupid winking fish.....ugh!
Sign In or Register to comment.