Controversial opinions about Bond films

1248249251253254707

Comments

  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    Posts: 7,207
    octofinger wrote: »

    I'll let Bond get away with a lot. I'll forgive bad fashion, or bad humour, or gaping wide plot holes. But Bond cannot be boring.

    I don't agree about DAF being boring but I agree with your statement. In fact that's why I put FYEO last and SF a lot lower than most fans.
  • Posts: 11,189
    octofinger wrote: »
    Brozza's worst movies are over-the-top, and Craig's are overwrought, and Moore's are campy, but DAF is boring. The actors -especially Connery - seem bored by the proceedings. The production is often indifferent (continuity errors, gaps in narrative). The visuals are flat and dull, with Vegas in particular looking totally uninteresting. I can't remember a thing about the score or music except the ho-hum title track. The action sequences are boring and I don't find myself particularly caring about what's at stake. (Diamonds? On a satellite? Or something?)

    I really find myself agreeing with you on this. I like aspects of DAF (namely Jill St. John and Charles Gray), but it really is the only film in the series that I genuinely struggle to finish.
  • Posts: 11,189
    Birdleson wrote: »
    octofinger wrote: »
    OK, here's one:

    DAF is the worst Bond film because it's boring, and being boring is the only unforgivable sin in the Bond canon.


    I find DAF quite entertaining, but your reasoning is exactly why SP is my least favorite.

    I certainly agree that the last half hour or so of SP is pretty dull.

  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,011
    I'm remotely intrigued during bits of the PTS, then I tune out until a few moments in Rome, where I tune out once again until the train fight, and then that's it for me, honestly. Maybe a collective 15-20 minutes of moments/scenes/shots/lines that I like, and that's about it. Makes the running time seem even longer, in my case.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    I've said this before and I'll say it again: I've never seen so many people fiddling with their phones in a theatre as I did during my 2nd watch of SP. It kicked into a frenzy after the plane chase (particularly at L'Americaine), stopped briefly for the train fight, and then resumed until the end. It was like a light show in the seats below me.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    Rude.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,011
    bondjames wrote: »
    I've said this before and I'll say it again: I've never seen so many people fiddling with their phones in a theatre as I did during my 2nd watch of SP. It kicked into a frenzy after the plane chase (particularly at L'Americaine), stopped briefly for the train fight, and then resumed until the end. It was like a light show in the seats below me.

    That would piss me off for ANY film I saw in theaters, whether I was loving it or not. If you can't put away any electronic devices for two hours and sit through a movie undisturbed, then the theaters aren't a place for you.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    Yep.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    Posts: 9,084
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I've never seen so many people fiddling with their phones in a theatre as I did during my 2nd watch of SP.
    I fully agree with your sentiments while not limiting those activities to SPECTRE. I don't normally go to a movie theatre anymore (unless I think I desperately have to see a new Bond movie before it becomes available on disk), but I hate the noise and unrest that other people bring into the "experience". People using their smartphones (especially with sound on) are the same as those eating potato chips/crisps from the bag, opening beverage cans and so forth. Just worse. But there's nothing to do about it except staying away from those overpriced panoptica and instead opting to wait a few months and watching the movie in your home, for about the same price.
  • GBFGBF
    Posts: 3,198
    I have also never seen anyone ever looking at his smartphone during a film in the theatre... but maybe that's because I usual focus on the film... :-)
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,011
    GBF wrote: »
    I have also never seen anyone ever looking at his smartphone during a film in the theatre... but maybe that's because I usual focus on the film... :-)

    I give 100% focus to any film I catch in theaters (unless it's shit and I start to tune out), and it's still easy to catch someone using it. Sitting in a dark theater where the only light available emanates from the screen or EXIT signs, it's incredibly simple to spot someone on their phone, lowered brightness or not.
  • Posts: 16,223
    Interesting to realize as movie goers- this has been an issue now for about 20 years. I can remember cell phones ringing and people actually answering/engaging in conversation during a film back then. Now it's the ultra bright lights of the smartphone. Very obnoxious.
  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing Long Neck Ice Cold Beer Never Broke My Heart
    Posts: 4,602
    I remember leaving SP after both showings and people not being overenthuastic. It was just ho hum. But i do remember leaving CR after all 5 showings and people being blown away.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited February 2017 Posts: 23,883
    Since it was my 2nd viewing, I didn't mind the phones all that much. In fact, to an extent I sympathized, because I realized how bloody boring the film must have been for all these people. It is at this point that I knew SP was not destined to be a classic.

    If it was my first viewing, then I would have lost it. Thankfully I didn't notice any of this then, but it could just have been because I was more focused on the film the first time out.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 41,011
    The midnight showings I attended for both SF and SP were night-and-day different, in terms of attendance/eager excitement for those involved. So many people were dressed up for SF, clapping or cheering during some sequences, and it was rather silent and unengaged for SP, minus a moment or two, if that.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    edited February 2017 Posts: 15,723
    However, @bondjames, if CR had been released in 2015, you'd have seen a similar light show in the cinema during the Venice sequence of that film.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    That is a good point @DaltonCraig007, and I think you're correct.

    If I were to guess, I think the section of the film after 'ball buster' which deals with the recuperation (loss of armour and all that gibberish) all the way up to the Vesper betrayal in Venice would have had the theatre lit up like a Christmas tree.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Bottom line is, people who use phones in cinemas should fuck off home.
  • royale65royale65 Caustic misanthrope reporting for duty.
    Posts: 4,423
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    GBF wrote: »
    I have also never seen anyone ever looking at his smartphone during a film in the theatre... but maybe that's because I usual focus on the film... :-)

    I give 100% focus to any film I catch in theaters (unless it's shit and I start to tune out), and it's still easy to catch someone using it. Sitting in a dark theater where the only light available emanates from the screen or EXIT signs, it's incredibly simple to spot someone on their phone, lowered brightness or not.

    Indeed. I was enthralled by Spectre, yet in the Moroccan scenes people were fidgeting and using their damned phones. It's very hard too ignore.

  • Posts: 16,223
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    The midnight showings I attended for both SF and SP were night-and-day different, in terms of attendance/eager excitement for those involved. So many people were dressed up for SF, clapping or cheering during some sequences, and it was rather silent and unengaged for SP, minus a moment or two, if that.

    Yeah. Audiences were very much into SF. I actually think all the negative publicity surrounding SP put a damper on audience enthusiasm. Media obsessing on the wrist slashing remarks, whether or not Elba should be Bond etc etc brought a negative cloud over SP. SF was a celebration.
  • TheSharkFromJawsTheSharkFromJaws Amity Island Waters
    Posts: 127
    suavejmf wrote: »
    LALD is my favourite Moore Bond and performance by far.
    100% Agreed.

  • TheSharkFromJawsTheSharkFromJaws Amity Island Waters
    Posts: 127
    GoldenGun wrote: »
    I don't agree about DAF being boring but I agree with your statement. In fact that's why I put FYEO last and SF a lot lower than most fans.
    Agreed on FYEO. It's among my least watched and just too dull and generic imo.

    SF, though, I disagree on. I think it's one of the best paced and most thoroughly entertaining from start-to-finish.

  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    Posts: 9,084
    GoldenGun wrote: »
    I don't agree about DAF being boring but I agree with your statement. In fact that's why I put FYEO last and SF a lot lower than most fans.
    Agreed on FYEO. It's among my least watched and just too dull and generic imo.

    SF, though, I disagree on. I think it's one of the best paced and most thoroughly entertaining from start-to-finish.
    That's why these opinions are considered controversial. For years my opinion has been that FYEO is the best Moore film of them all, rivalled (if at all) by TSWLM, and I'd still rate them about the same (8/10). I don't think it's dull and/or generic, though of course it has its low points (say Conti score, Bibi character, parrot solution, delicatessen in stainless steel). For me, it remains a welcome return to classical Bond stories after the overkill that was a succession of TSWLM and MR (as much as I like those). Largely it was back to basics and Fleming.

    And SKYFALL is the best Bond film since FRWL. No kidding, and therefore no addition of "It's true. People tell me that all the time."
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    Posts: 7,207
    j_w_pepper wrote: »

    And SKYFALL is the best Bond film since FRWL. No kidding, and therefore no addition of "It's true. People tell me that all the time."

    I'm afraid I must disagree, Skyfall is the most anti-Bondian film of the whole franchise. 007 is no longer a gentleman spy with class but a worn-out, beardy bodybuilder who drinks Heineken from the bottle and plays working class bar games with scorpions. This film portrays a "Bond" for the politically correct masses who lost his elegance and with that basically his essence.
  • GBFGBF
    Posts: 3,198
    GoldenGun wrote: »
    j_w_pepper wrote: »

    And SKYFALL is the best Bond film since FRWL. No kidding, and therefore no addition of "It's true. People tell me that all the time."

    I'm afraid I must disagree, Skyfall is the most anti-Bondian film of the whole franchise. 007 is no longer a gentleman spy with class but a worn-out, beardy bodybuilder who drinks Heineken from the bottle and plays working class bar games with scorpions. This film portrays a "Bond" for the politically correct masses who lost his elegance and with that basically his essence.

    But has Craig's Bond ever had the elegance of a gentleman? Think about him ordering a Vodka Martini in Casino Royale. A funny scene but not how a gentleman would behave.
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    Posts: 7,207
    GBF wrote: »
    GoldenGun wrote: »
    j_w_pepper wrote: »

    And SKYFALL is the best Bond film since FRWL. No kidding, and therefore no addition of "It's true. People tell me that all the time."

    I'm afraid I must disagree, Skyfall is the most anti-Bondian film of the whole franchise. 007 is no longer a gentleman spy with class but a worn-out, beardy bodybuilder who drinks Heineken from the bottle and plays working class bar games with scorpions. This film portrays a "Bond" for the politically correct masses who lost his elegance and with that basically his essence.

    But has Craig's Bond ever had the elegance of a gentleman? Think about him ordering a Vodka Martini in Casino Royale. A funny scene but not how a gentleman would behave.

    It bothers me throughout his tenure, less so in QOS but to a greater extend in SF.
  • GBFGBF
    Posts: 3,198
    Interestingly I feel a bit the other way around in this regard. In Skyfall, his bad psycholgical condition was a part of the plot, at least in the beginning... Bond was not in a good shape and behaved the way he did because of that. I rather regaeded that issue as an obvious contrast to his usual "Bondian" behaviour in order to show that something wasn't in order. A bit like Brosnan in the opening of DAD has lost his elegance after being tortured (maybe the scorpions were a tribute to the TS in DAD). So I guess this obvious "unbondian" behaviour in the beginning of Skyfall bothered me less than his rather subtle "unbondian" behaviour in Skyfall's two predecessors.
  • suavejmf wrote: »
    LALD is my favourite Moore Bond and performance by far.
    100% Agreed.

    Mine also great movie.

  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,385
    GoldenGun wrote: »
    j_w_pepper wrote: »

    And SKYFALL is the best Bond film since FRWL. No kidding, and therefore no addition of "It's true. People tell me that all the time."

    I'm afraid I must disagree, Skyfall is the most anti-Bondian film of the whole franchise. 007 is no longer a gentleman spy with class but a worn-out, beardy bodybuilder who drinks Heineken from the bottle and plays working class bar games with scorpions. This film portrays a "Bond" for the politically correct masses who lost his elegance and with that basically his essence.

    And yet he has a family manse...the script makes no sense.

    Then in SP we see his flat. That Just doesn't feel like Bond either (yes, I know, I know, May and LALD/Miss Caruso, but since CR we have had far too many scenes with the MI6 characters at home). It used to be a rarity (OHMSS).
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    I agree. Bond's flat in SP is shocking......he is very particular (in Fleming's books and say in DN).....the flat would be immaculate not like a student not bothering to unpack/ dress the place.
Sign In or Register to comment.