›

Controversial opinions about Bond films

1…223224226228229…707

Comments

  • TellyBlofeldTellyBlofeld
    Posts: 489
    I'm not even stating that I agree with my statement, but I would ask how long ago did this Simpson episode air? Would anyone today even know who Oddjob was/is?
  • LudovicoLudovico
    edited January 2017 Posts: 15,218
    Here's another one: while not a great Bond girl, Agent Fields is good enough to be underrated.
  • barryt007barryt007
    Posts: 19,339
    Definately ....
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    She is smoking hot, yes!
    Everytime she wears that Inspector Clouseau coat I really, really, really want her to show us that she wears nothing under it.
  • barryt007barryt007
    Posts: 19,339
    she should have been a main Bond girl,or at least kept alive so Gemma could return as Fields later,she is young and talented enough....gutted.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    barryt007 wrote: »
    she should have been a main Bond girl,or at least kept alive so Gemma could return as Fields later,she is young and talented enough....gutted.
    Same here. I would have loved for her to be the new MP. Perfect for it.
  • CrzChris4CrzChris4
    Posts: 463
    Watched You Only Live Twice the other night...

    With the exception of "Bond becoming Japanese" and some shoddy special effects work, I think that this could easily have been the perfect ending to Connery's run as Bond. The early Connery films definitely build up to a thrilling conclusion and I definitely think the reveal of Blofeld and the following battle inside the Volcano Layer are two of the best examples of said things in the entire franchise.

    Also, the track "Countdown for Blofeld" just might be one of the best Bond tracks written by Barry, period.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,218
    bondjames wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    she should have been a main Bond girl,or at least kept alive so Gemma could return as Fields later,she is young and talented enough....gutted.
    Same here. I would have loved for her to be the new MP. Perfect for it.

    Gemma Aterton is too sexy for Moneypenny. So is Naomi Harris (this is another of my controversial opinions).

    Regarding Fields, her murder was a tad gratuitous, but anyway overall the station agent that is a glorified office clerk and simply becomes an accidental "victim" of Bond worked very well. Too often they make Bond girls fellow secret agents. Fields had at least some personality, was not merely good looking (but boy was she good looking!)
  • GBFGBF
    Posts: 3,198
    Birdleson wrote: »
    Fields is a favorite Bond Girl of mine.

    She is beautifull but really redundant. In my eyes, she is a Paula Caplan clone, a minor character who is mainly there to be killed so that Bond is angry.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,218
    She is also there to sleep with. And sometimes that's pretty much why a Bond girl is there for. At least she has personality and while not time is spent on the seduction we get the idea why she fell for it afterwards.
  • IncompetentHenchmanIncompetentHenchman
    Posts: 1,817
    Did Bond really get angry at Paula's death though?
  • barryt007barryt007
    Posts: 19,339
    IncompetentHenchman wrote: »
    Did Bond really get angry at Paula's death though?

    No he didn't :

    "Oh and tell him Paula is dead"..

    Reply : "OK"....

  • GBFGBF
    Posts: 3,198
    Well he probably found Fields more attractive ...
  • LordBrettSinclairLordBrettSinclair Greensleeves
    Posts: 167
    The first three Mr Connery, Lazenby and Moore are much better than the three that followed. Mr Dalton was great though, Brosnan tried to be Moore (fail), Mr Craig tries to be Connery (epic fail).
  • RC7RC7
    edited January 2017 Posts: 10,512
    LordBrettSinclair wrote: »
    The first three Mr Connery, Lazenby and Moore are much better than the three that followed. Mr Dalton was great though, Brosnan tried to be Moore (fail), Mr Craig tries to be Connery (epic fail).

    Craig tries to be no one. In fact he doesn't 'try', he just isn't.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    RC7 wrote: »
    LordBrettSinclair wrote: »
    The first three Mr Connery, Lazenby and Moore are much better than the three that followed. Mr Dalton was great though, Brosnan tried to be Moore (fail), Mr Craig tries to be Connery (epic fail).

    Craig tries to be no one. In fact he doesn't 'try', he just isn't.

    I do think in SP (and a little in SF) he does the "acting cool" thing (his slightly awkward smirk and the way he struts).
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    The very end of CR, I thought he tried to give an impression of Connery, and I thought he succeeded well.
  • Some_Kind_Of_HeroSome_Kind_Of_Hero
    Posts: 6,844
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    The very end of CR, I thought he tried to give an impression of Connery, and I thought he succeeded well.

    That was Jesper Christensen, and we're talking about Connery in his prime, not Connery today.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    LordBrettSinclair wrote: »
    The first three Mr Connery, Lazenby and Moore are much better than the three that followed. Mr Dalton was great though, Brosnan tried to be Moore (fail), Mr Craig tries to be Connery (epic fail).

    Craig tries to be no one. In fact he doesn't 'try', he just isn't.

    I do think in SP (and a little in SF) he does the "acting cool" thing (his slightly awkward smirk and the way he struts).

    I think he is cool. Particularly in this day and age.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    I do think in SP (and a little in SF) he does the "acting cool" thing (his slightly awkward smirk and the way he struts).
    Then that's a potential problem. A Bond actor should never look like he's trying in my view.
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,218
    I never thought Craig looked like he was trying. Lazenby yes, Brosnan too sometimes and to be controversial Dalton as well.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    I felt it with Craig for the first time in SP when he was strutting across the roof tops, and then again when he was with MP. There are other instances, but these were the first (after 4 films). I never felt it with Laz. I thought he radiated natural cool like Connery, but without the same off the charts charisma.
  • LordBrettSinclairLordBrettSinclair Greensleeves
    Posts: 167
    Connery, Moore and Lazenby never feel forced or "acting". They are natural. Especially Moore who is basically just himself which I find super cool!

    Craig is mixed, everything in Skyfall felt forced, in CR he is perfect, in QOS basically just is base jumping, fighting and looking cool bleeding.

    SP is perfect in a way for me because he tries to be Moore and Connery at the same time, even Brosnan! It feels a bit strange.
  • Some_Kind_Of_HeroSome_Kind_Of_Hero
    edited January 2017 Posts: 6,844
    Brosnan forced being cool? I think along with Connery at his peak, Brosnan was one of the most naturally cool actors in the tux. Everyone's got their own prescription of eyewear I guess.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,511
    @RC7, in absolute agreement; Craig is the first 007 actor I felt exuded being cool since Connery. Not because he was trying to be, but he, like Connery, can just "be" cool. He makes it look effortless.
    Not so much the other Bonds.
    And he certainly is ruthlessly more cool than most of the modern day actors, and leagues apart from the 007 hopefuls.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited January 2017 Posts: 11,189
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I never thought Craig looked like he was trying. Lazenby yes, Brosnan too sometimes and to be controversial Dalton as well.

    I don't think Dalton did it much as Brosnan and Craig but one moment that does come to mind is his delivery of "amazing this modern safety glass" in TLD.

    Another controversial view: As cool as Connery was he definitely puts on something of an act too (notice how he pauses or says "err" during some of his lines "I have a....slight inferiority complex", "err....make that an hour and a half")
  • patbpatb
    edited January 2017 Posts: 4,617
    One of the themes that charactrizes much of the DC era is the "hollow victory", "Bond on the back foot" tone IMHO. He spends much time on the defensive and when there is humour, it is defensive, ironic etc. He is angry, annoyed, tortured, tired, reactive, grieving,grumpy, injured, blooded etc etc, and its this version of Bond that I think he got just right and, perhaps as we have seen from his press interviews, quotes etc, he has brought some of his own "not suffering fools gladly" persona to the screen.
    So when we see him try to pull off a different style of Bond with late Connery/Moore style, witty one liners from a Bond who is in full control (including the smirks), for me, this does not work. Not sure if this is because its not the DC Bond that I have learned to love or the fact that DC just can't do that type of Bond (or both).
    Its also interesting that the script writers who helped create this version of Bond (successful in broad terms we surely have to agree?) then try to push the character in another direction.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    patb wrote: »
    One of the themes that charactrizes much of the DC era is the "hollow victory", "Bond on the back foot" tone IMHO. He spends much time on the defensive and when there is humour, it is defensive, ironic etc. He is angry, annoyed, tortured, tired, reactive, grieving,grumpy, injured, blooded etc etc, and its this version of Bond that I think he got just right and, perhaps as we have seen from his press interviews, quotes etc, he has brought some of his own "not suffering fools gladly" persona to the screen.
    So when we see him try to pull off a different style of Bond with late Connery/Moore style, witty one liners from a Bond who is in full control (including the smirks), for me, this does not work. Not sure if this is because its not the DC Bond that I have learned to love or that fact that DC just can't do that type of Bond (or both)
    +1. Well said.

    I personally think he can't do that type of Bond, and controversially, I never thought Brosnan could either. The trick is to deliver the one liners (no matter how poorly written) with authoritative conviction, which is something Connery and Moore always did to perfection. Brosnan and Craig almost seem embarrassed to be doing it, and that's where it falls flat for me.

    He should stick to the earlier characterization, which is far more authentic and uniquely 'his'.
  • patbpatb
    Posts: 4,617
    Perhaps we were spoiled in the long term as Connery/Moore were so seemingly effortless in this area that we took it for granted and, since then, we have seen a series of respected actors struggle with this part of Bond's persona.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    patb wrote: »
    Perhaps we were spoiled in the long term as Connery/Moore were so seemingly effortless in this area that we took it for granted and, since then, we have seen a series of respected actors struggle with this part of Bond's persona.
    That is exactly my view. We indeed took it for granted, as did the public at large, and it became an essential part of the film iteration. It is far more difficult to master than people realize.
Sign In or Register to comment.