›

Controversial opinions about Bond films

1…256257259261262…707

Comments

  • MalloryMallory
    Posts: 2,165
    I appreciate that CR is a better written film with a stronger narrative, but Skyfall beats it every time for me.

    Bond is so much more than the basic nuts-and-bolts plots they all have. Its a package of action, cinematography, one-liners, bond music and just general 'Bond-isms". And for that, Skyfall wins every time. It just excites me more.

    Though CR easily has the better Bond Girls...
  • MalloryMallory
    Posts: 2,165
    And another controversial opinion, given the usual consensus around these parts:

    Madeline's theme is a better romantic theme than Vesper's theme.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited February 2017 Posts: 23,883
    @Roadphill I do agree that SF wasn't perfect. I've expressed my views on where it could have been better on other threads here in the past, and you've captured some of the issues in your comments above.

    Where I think it succeeded was on a visceral level with the audience (and with me as well). It may have been a case of 'style over substance', but what style it was! It resonated at an instinctual level with the public. Maybe it was the revenge story. Maybe it was because we cared about the characters and their motivations. Maybe it was because of the style and flair of the cinematography. Maybe it was because it wasn't as 'downer' as the same year's TDKR (it's biggest competitor). I'm not sure what it was, but it certainly was the 'feel good' film of the year for me, in the sense that I came out of the theatre thinking EON had delivered something different and special for the 50th anniversary. It was definitely 'Mendes meets Bond' in a good way imho.

    While I'm sure many will disagree, I think SF has similarities to FRWL on a stylistic level, in the sense that they are both deeply impactful Bond films which are very different from other entries in the canon. These sort of entries can only come along once in a while imho, to punctuate the era.
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    Look what I'm asking is as a bond fan skyfall is near the bottom as it just mienadars the whole film and makes poor sense with lack luster action sequences and it feels like the movie never gets started, is my opinion alone and likely to change?
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited February 2017 Posts: 23,883
    JamesBondKenya wrote: »
    Look what I'm asking is as a bond fan skyfall is near the bottom as it just mienadars the whole film and makes poor sense with lack luster action sequences and it feels like the movie never gets started, is my opinion alone and likely to change?
    I don't disagree with you on the points that you've noted above which disappoint you. You are not alone in your opinion as far as I know - there are quite a few who feel the same way about SF. Your opinion might change, but then again it might not.

    When I was your age I prioritized action over style, glamour, dialogue & atmosphere. As I've said before, my favourite Connery was YOLT when I was young. I couldn't stand FRWL. These days, I'm the opposite. In fact, I think action can be quite boring if not properly integrated with story and atmosphere, because we've pretty much seen it all before.

    I think SF is a nice balance between a talky spy film and an action oriented one. It's certainly no MI-GP, but it's not Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy or Smiley's People either. It sits nicely in the middle, like FRWL. I think it succeeded at what it wanted to achieve.
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    bondjames wrote: »
    JamesBondKenya wrote: »
    Look what I'm asking is as a bond fan skyfall is near the bottom as it just mienadars the whole film and makes poor sense with lack luster action sequences and it feels like the movie never gets started, is my opinion alone and likely to change?
    I don't disagree with you on the points that you've noted above which disappoint you. You are not alone in your opinion as far as I know - there are quite a few who feel the same way about SF. Your opinion might change, but then again it might not.

    When I was your age I prioritized action over style, glamour, dialogue & atmosphere. As I've said before, my favourite Connery was YOLT when I was young. I couldn't stand FRWL. These days, I'm the opposite. In fact, I think action can be quite boring if not properly integrated with story and atmosphere, because we've pretty much seen it all before.

    I think SF is a nice balance between a talky spy film and an action oriented one. It's certainly no MI-GP, but it's not Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy or Smiley's People either. It sits nicely in the middle, like FRWL. I think it succeeded at what it wanted to achieve.

    Okay fair enough what do u think of DAD I just watched it and despite it being the worst bond movie I don't actually hate it because it's so silly and makes no sense and is so bad that I can't help but think that's it's better than the world is not enough because at least is knows it's garbage and doesn't pretend to be anything and just embraces the silliest bond film ever while I love harder casino Royale LTK bond I don't hate DAD because it is still entertaining if u turn your brain off
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited February 2017 Posts: 23,883
    JamesBondKenya wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    JamesBondKenya wrote: »
    Look what I'm asking is as a bond fan skyfall is near the bottom as it just mienadars the whole film and makes poor sense with lack luster action sequences and it feels like the movie never gets started, is my opinion alone and likely to change?
    I don't disagree with you on the points that you've noted above which disappoint you. You are not alone in your opinion as far as I know - there are quite a few who feel the same way about SF. Your opinion might change, but then again it might not.

    When I was your age I prioritized action over style, glamour, dialogue & atmosphere. As I've said before, my favourite Connery was YOLT when I was young. I couldn't stand FRWL. These days, I'm the opposite. In fact, I think action can be quite boring if not properly integrated with story and atmosphere, because we've pretty much seen it all before.

    I think SF is a nice balance between a talky spy film and an action oriented one. It's certainly no MI-GP, but it's not Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy or Smiley's People either. It sits nicely in the middle, like FRWL. I think it succeeded at what it wanted to achieve.

    Okay fair enough what do u think of DAD I just watched it and despite it being the worst bond movie I don't actually hate it because it's so silly and makes no sense and is so bad that I can't help but think that's it's better than the world is not enough because at least is knows it's garbage and doesn't pretend to be anything and just embraces the silliest bond film ever while I love harder casino Royale LTK bond I don't hate DAD because it is still entertaining if u turn your brain off
    I don't mind DAD at all. It's a very entertaining film. Sure, it's a train wreck in some ways, but as you suggested, it embraces its stupidity openly and proudly. There's something to be said for that. I personally can't stand TWINE (my #24 of 24) so you won't get any arguments from me about which of these two is better. The fencing scene is superb, Brosnan is in fine form & Stephens hams it up like no other. Plus it has Rosamund Pike.
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    bondjames wrote: »
    JamesBondKenya wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    JamesBondKenya wrote: »
    Look what I'm asking is as a bond fan skyfall is near the bottom as it just mienadars the whole film and makes poor sense with lack luster action sequences and it feels like the movie never gets started, is my opinion alone and likely to change?
    I don't disagree with you on the points that you've noted above which disappoint you. You are not alone in your opinion as far as I know - there are quite a few who feel the same way about SF. Your opinion might change, but then again it might not.

    When I was your age I prioritized action over style, glamour, dialogue & atmosphere. As I've said before, my favourite Connery was YOLT when I was young. I couldn't stand FRWL. These days, I'm the opposite. In fact, I think action can be quite boring if not properly integrated with story and atmosphere, because we've pretty much seen it all before.

    I think SF is a nice balance between a talky spy film and an action oriented one. It's certainly no MI-GP, but it's not Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy or Smiley's People either. It sits nicely in the middle, like FRWL. I think it succeeded at what it wanted to achieve.

    Okay fair enough what do u think of DAD I just watched it and despite it being the worst bond movie I don't actually hate it because it's so silly and makes no sense and is so bad that I can't help but think that's it's better than the world is not enough because at least is knows it's garbage and doesn't pretend to be anything and just embraces the silliest bond film ever while I love harder casino Royale LTK bond I don't hate DAD because it is still entertaining if u turn your brain off
    I don't mind DAD at all. It's a very entertaining film. Sure, it's a train wreck in some ways, but as you suggested, it embraces its stupidity openly and proudly. There's something to be said for that. I personally can't stand TWINE (my #24 of 24) so you won't get any arguments from me about which of these two is better. The fencing scene is superb, Brosnan is in fine form & Stephens hams it up like no other. Plus it has Rosamund Pike.

    Yeah I think Brosnan is great as bond and really puts a certain entertainment to his bond performance and I would like to relate DAD to diamonds Are Forever as that is a film that is kinda silly but doesn't work for me as well as this one does DAD is a terrible bond films and a terrible movie in general and had I been around for bond with this one in the theatre I would have been upset, but as I'm rewatching these bond films in order I've reached this one and it's really refreshing and very entertaining I can't help but saying that I enjoyed watching it
  • RoadphillRoadphill United Kingdom
    Posts: 984
    bondjames wrote: »
    JamesBondKenya wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    JamesBondKenya wrote: »
    Look what I'm asking is as a bond fan skyfall is near the bottom as it just mienadars the whole film and makes poor sense with lack luster action sequences and it feels like the movie never gets started, is my opinion alone and likely to change?
    I don't disagree with you on the points that you've noted above which disappoint you. You are not alone in your opinion as far as I know - there are quite a few who feel the same way about SF. Your opinion might change, but then again it might not.

    When I was your age I prioritized action over style, glamour, dialogue & atmosphere. As I've said before, my favourite Connery was YOLT when I was young. I couldn't stand FRWL. These days, I'm the opposite. In fact, I think action can be quite boring if not properly integrated with story and atmosphere, because we've pretty much seen it all before.

    I think SF is a nice balance between a talky spy film and an action oriented one. It's certainly no MI-GP, but it's not Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy or Smiley's People either. It sits nicely in the middle, like FRWL. I think it succeeded at what it wanted to achieve.

    Okay fair enough what do u think of DAD I just watched it and despite it being the worst bond movie I don't actually hate it because it's so silly and makes no sense and is so bad that I can't help but think that's it's better than the world is not enough because at least is knows it's garbage and doesn't pretend to be anything and just embraces the silliest bond film ever while I love harder casino Royale LTK bond I don't hate DAD because it is still entertaining if u turn your brain off
    I don't mind DAD at all. It's a very entertaining film. Sure, it's a train wreck in some ways, but as you suggested, it embraces its stupidity openly and proudly. There's something to be said for that. I personally can't stand TWINE (my #24 of 24) so you won't get any arguments from me about which of these two is better. The fencing scene is superb, Brosnan is in fine form & Stephens hams it up like no other. Plus it has Rosamund Pike.
    Interesting you chaps talking about TWINE now as I was thinking about starting a thread on the very subject.

    I agree, when DAD turns, around the 40 min mark,it really turns. Sure, the dialogue was insipid and the invisible car, robot suit ect where utterly ridiculous. The thing is, it is still quite a spectacular film, and it sticks to the old Cubby edict of "Every penny onscreen" so I cant hate it for that. And Toby Stephens shit eating grin.

    The frustrating thing about TWINE is that, with a few tweaks, and a more capable action director(I know Apted has always been highly rated but I dont see it) it could have been excellent. The basic premise of Bond being in love with the villain, then having to kill her in cold blood is magnificent. There is just too much ham fisted stuff around it. It is neither feast or fowl( reallly hardcore Bond fans will see what I did there!) And ends up executing both aspects, the drama and the fun stuff, poorly.

    The scene where Bond shoots Elektra is still a great one though. Shame about the rest.

  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    edited February 2017 Posts: 5,131
    Every penny on the screen? The Ice Palace and Plane scenes look like studios and the CGI is dire. The slow mo scenes are also tacky. Thank god Martin Campbell brought glamour and class back in the next film.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,304
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Birdleson wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    Controversial: OP has the most realistic, and one of the most suspenseful, plots.

    I'll give you plot, but certainly not realistic in execution (Tarzan yell, Octopussy's acrobats assault on Khan, "Sit", Bed of nails, etc).

    Bond checking a fake watch in a Gorrilla suit when millions of lives are at stake. Daft and ruined the tension.

    I thought it was a real watch.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    The question is, was the watch a part of the costume or did Bond strap it on himself?
  • patbpatb
    Posts: 4,617
    SF has done this forum a favour IMHO as it pushed the boundaries of what is a Bond movie and established which fans are more flexible and which fans much prefer a stricter regine.
    So, for example, the objection of "no Bond girl". It's something that never crossed my mind during the movie and does not bother me but I have to admit that it does make SF unusual But unusual does not mean bad.
    If our interpretation of what defines a Bond movie becomes such a straight jacket, then we leave little room for creativity and boundary pushing in future and it leaves Bond in danger of just cliche after cliche.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited February 2017 Posts: 23,883
    I agree @patb, and I felt that way after leaving the theatre in 2012. I recall thinking 'well that was different' and yet I was enthused. I felt like they'd reset for the new millennium in a way. Unshackled themselves.

    The trick, as I've said many times before, is to execute the premise properly. It doesn't matter what you're trying to achieve, just do it well. I contend that SF achieved what Mendes wanted to do. Plot was secondary to characters in SF. It was a Mendes Bond film. In that respect, it succeeded.
  • patbpatb
    Posts: 4,617
    I think there are varying views on Bond, some fans seek to build a wall around the concept to keep everything very tight, traditional and restrictive whilst others think that there is still a whole World to explore.
    For the former, going outside of the walls is a criticism in itself, no matter how well executed.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,978
    But there is a point where it's not just the baby and the bath water that is being thrown out, but the bath and almost everything else in the bathroom. If it no longer resembles a Bond film, why should I think of it as a Bond film?
  • patbpatb
    Posts: 4,617
    But our own defintion of what "resembles a Bond movie" is different, there is no agreed defintion. At the end of the day, its an art form, not a technical definition.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    @MajorDSmythe, I can only say that when I saw this trailer (it still blows me away even today - the best one since GE imho), I felt like EON were going to deliver a 'classic' Bond film, and they did, at least imho. It certainly felt like Bond to me, on a visceral level. Far more so than anything out of the Brosnan era, apart from GE. Like I said, it's visceral - something subconscious that harkens to the best of Bond from the past.

  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    My favourite recent trailer was the CR teaser trailer. Visceral.
  • patbpatb
    edited February 2017 Posts: 4,617
    Agree but many dont judge it on those grounds and look for the tick boxes that make a good or acceptable Bond.
    No Bond Girl? SF's a bad Bond movie QED
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,978
    I suppose the trick is to keep all the Bondian elements, but present them in a new fashion.
    SF is a well made film, but.... how can I put it, it's like it is too full of itself. All this faffing about with Bond's psyche and his past, I don't need to know about that, more to the point, I don't want to. It's that mystery about Bond that makes up part of the appeal, mystery which has been removed during the Craig films. The Bond films of the past didn't waste time with all this navel gazing, they just got straight into action, stylish, well made action. The sooner the series sheds all this inner turmoil, for an experienced Bond who can be left to get on with his job, the better.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    edited February 2017 Posts: 5,131
    Severine was underused I agree, but she I stunning and intriguing.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited February 2017 Posts: 23,883
    patb wrote: »
    Agree but many dont judge it on those grounds and look for the tick boxes that make a good or acceptable Bond.
    No Bond Girl? SF's a bad Bond movie QED
    It's that box ticking approach that led us to the shame of the 90's. Bond films that felt like they were made by robots (or committees) who had gleaned what were essential aspects of Bond and then just 'inserted them' where the algorithms (or focus groups) suggested.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    bondjames wrote: »
    patb wrote: »
    Agree but many dont judge it on those grounds and look for the tick boxes that make a good or acceptable Bond.
    No Bond Girl? SF's a bad Bond movie QED
    It's that box ticking approach that led us to the shame of the 90's. Bond films that felt like they were made by robots (or committees) who had gleaned what were essential aspects of Bond and then just 'inserted them' where the algorithms (or focus groups) suggested.

    Great post. Totally agree.
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    patb wrote: »
    But our own defintion of what "resembles a Bond movie" is different, there is no agreed defintion. At the end of the day, its an art form, not a technical definition.

    And that's why I and probably some other people love every bond film in some way even the ones that arnt the best are still entertaining to me
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    I think OHMSS could be the best bond film maybe but for me it settles in a number 6 or 7 spot as I despise Lazenby in that role
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    echo wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Birdleson wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    Controversial: OP has the most realistic, and one of the most suspenseful, plots.

    I'll give you plot, but certainly not realistic in execution (Tarzan yell, Octopussy's acrobats assault on Khan, "Sit", Bed of nails, etc).

    Bond checking a fake watch in a Gorrilla suit when millions of lives are at stake. Daft and ruined the tension.

    I thought it was a real watch.

    Ha ha. It wasn't. But either way it ruined the tension of the scene. He risked getting caught for a joke!!!
  • cwl007cwl007 England
    Posts: 611
    I have completely missed that, having watched Octopussy for 29 years. I always assumed he was checking the time as in '' shit, I don't have much time, nuclear bomb, I'm stuck in a train carriage etc etc"
    Now you've pointed it out why would a bloody gorilla have a watch on!
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,976
    suavejmf wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Birdleson wrote: »
    echo wrote: »
    Controversial: OP has the most realistic, and one of the most suspenseful, plots.

    I'll give you plot, but certainly not realistic in execution (Tarzan yell, Octopussy's acrobats assault on Khan, "Sit", Bed of nails, etc).

    Bond checking a fake watch in a Gorrilla suit when millions of lives are at stake. Daft and ruined the tension.

    I thought it was a real watch.

    Ha ha. It wasn't. But either way it ruined the tension of the scene. He risked getting caught for a joke!!!

    Wow, that is rich. I also assumed he had a watch on. Risking the lives of thousands of people, just so he could get a slight bit of humor out of his own joke. Love it.
  • QuantumOrganizationQuantumOrganization We have people everywhere
    Posts: 1,187
    ha
Sign In or Register to comment.