›

Controversial opinions about Bond films

1…326327329331332…707

Comments

  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    Watch DAF straight after DN and the difference is astounding.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    edited August 2017 Posts: 9,020
    .
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    My controversial opinion.....from books, documentaries and reports....it seems that Cubby was the smarter, charismatic, personable, business minded and reasonable Producer. Whereas Saltzman was egoistical, poor at relationship's, uncommercial and had some stupid erratic ideas around the franchise!!!
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    The first half of DAF is ok. Not great but ok. The second half though I find a real slog.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    edited August 2017 Posts: 9,020
    .
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,117
    DAF is maybe the most frustrating Bond movie. But I don't think the franchise could have survived another OHMSS.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    I like DAF and enjoy Connery's performance in the film as well. Lots of fun. Sure, he's not the man he once was (not by a long shot), but it's still effortless, particularly in comparison to some of his successors.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    It's effortless because he doesn't give a s##t.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    It's effortless because he doesn't give a s##t.
    Perhaps, but that effortless quality is a lot of what Bond is all about. Connery never had to try. He just is.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited June 2017 Posts: 11,189
    bondjames wrote: »
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    It's effortless because he doesn't give a s##t.
    Perhaps, but that effortless quality is a lot of what Bond is all about. Connery never had to try. He just is.

    I get what you mean but I think Connery sometimes boarders on bored.

    "A vast supply of diamonds being manipulated by an expert in light retraction"

    You half expect Connery to yawn after that line.
  • royale65royale65 Caustic misanthrope reporting for duty.
    Posts: 4,423
    I find Conners in DAF to be quite engaging. Clearly he's having fun.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited June 2017 Posts: 23,883
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    It's effortless because he doesn't give a s##t.
    Perhaps, but that effortless quality is a lot of what Bond is all about. Connery never had to try. He just is.

    I get what you mean but I think Connery sometimes boarders on bored.
    Could you give me an example? He seems far more engaged to me in DAF than he does in the later half of YOLT as a Jap. Now that's a bored actor!

    EDIT: Ok, saw your example. I'd be bored dishing out that line!
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    Connery is better in Zardoz than he is in DAF. =))
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,395
    Connery is better in DAF than YOLT at least.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    Connery is good with the humorous lines, but that's kind of it.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    Connery is good with the humorous lines, but that's kind of it.

    Agreed.

    Like I said, this is the guy in DN and FRWL and GF. It's a bit like when a music act gets back together - they might still be doing the same thing but the magic is long gone.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited June 2017 Posts: 23,883
    RC7 wrote: »
    It's a bit like when a music act gets back together - they might still be doing the same thing but the magic is long gone.
    It is like that, but I differ on the assessment. When a great music act gets back together (or a famed sportsman returns) the magic is indeed still there, but it's not consistent and is more prone to appearing in fits and bursts. That's how Connery is in DAF.

    I'm sure it was great to see him back in 1971, and he definitely still has the goods. It's just not up to the same consistent level as his incredibly high standard of 62/63.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited June 2017 Posts: 11,189
    To be honest I think the film is humorous in places, but not THAT funny.

    I wonder if its maybe an age thing on my part.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    edited August 2017 Posts: 9,020
    .
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    bondjames wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    It's a bit like when a music act gets back together - they might still be doing the same thing but the magic is long gone.
    It is like that, but I differ on the assessment. When a great music act gets back together (or a famed sportsman returns) the magic is indeed still there, but it's not consistent and is more prone to appearing in fits and bursts. That's how Connery is in DAF.

    I'm sure it was great to see him back in 1971, and he definitely still has the goods. It's just not up to the same consistent level as his incredibly high standard of 62/63.

    True, I guess the issue I have is the 'return' itself. I think every other Bond actor went out in better fashion based on their abilities/portrayal.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    RC7 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    It's a bit like when a music act gets back together - they might still be doing the same thing but the magic is long gone.
    It is like that, but I differ on the assessment. When a great music act gets back together (or a famed sportsman returns) the magic is indeed still there, but it's not consistent and is more prone to appearing in fits and bursts. That's how Connery is in DAF.

    I'm sure it was great to see him back in 1971, and he definitely still has the goods. It's just not up to the same consistent level as his incredibly high standard of 62/63.

    True, I guess the issue I have is the 'return' itself. I think every other Bond actor went out in better fashion based on their abilities/portrayal.
    He did suffer the biggest decline (I agree with that), and perhaps his legacy would have been more impressive had he not come back (for either DAF or NSNA).
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,395
    DAF is a secret masterpiece.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Controversial opinion: Bardem was too good as Silva. Unfortunately, the next villain was always going to come up short (literally as well as figuratively), which is what happened.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,968
    bondjames wrote: »
    Controversial opinion: Bardem was too good as Silva. Unfortunately, the next villain was always going to come up short (literally as well as figuratively), which is what happened.

    I'd say it's a combination of that and some poor writing on SP. If the likes of Waltz and Seydoux are coming across as wooden and/or unimpressive, the script needs major tweaking.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    Waltz and Seydoux might be less wooden with a better director. I don't think Mendes is an actor's director.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Murdock wrote: »
    Waltz and Seydoux might be less wooden with a better director. I don't think Mendes is an actor's director.
    Which is surprising, because he extracted some terrific performances from everyone (including Marlohe) in SF.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    bondjames wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    Waltz and Seydoux might be less wooden with a better director. I don't think Mendes is an actor's director.
    Which is surprising, because he extracted some terrific performances from everyone (including Marlohe) in SF.

    I'm guessing that was because his heart was in Skyfall. But I don't really see that in Spectre.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Murdock wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    Waltz and Seydoux might be less wooden with a better director. I don't think Mendes is an actor's director.
    Which is surprising, because he extracted some terrific performances from everyone (including Marlohe) in SF.

    I'm guessing that was because his heart was in Skyfall. But I don't really see that in Spectre.
    Yes, that's probably the case. Plus the script probably wasn't what he initially had in mind (there were so many fingers in it tweaking it after Logan's draft was rejected).
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,395
    Skyfall is a good movie, it's just not a good Bond film. Casino is a good movie and a good Bond film, that's the difference IMO. And QoS is neither.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Mendes4Lyfe wrote: »
    Skyfall is a good movie, it's just not a good Bond film. Casino is a good movie and a good Bond film, that's the difference IMO. And QoS is neither.
    I'm inclined to agree. I like QoS but objectively it has issues. It's a stub film and only really works as an epilogue to CR.
Sign In or Register to comment.