Controversial opinions about Bond films

1355356358360361707

Comments

  • MinionMinion Don't Hassle the Bond
    edited August 2017 Posts: 1,165
    Labyrinth-Bowie_0.jpg

    "Mr. Bond, who knew your eyes could be so cruel? Just like I can be so cruel! Oh May Day..."

    230-Sting.jpg

    "I WILL KILL HIMMMMM..."
  • Posts: 19,339
    Hahaha exactly,nice one !
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    bondjames wrote: »
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    The_Donald wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    stag wrote: »
    Controversial I know, and I have no intention of causing offence, but I'm saddened to say I have no interest in the forthcoming Bond film. IMHO although CR was a good (yet overlong) movie, the franchise has deteriorated in terms of the quality of its writing since then.
    I can understand your point of view and sympathize. Is there any franchise out there which can tide you over until Bond regains your trust? It would be terrible not to have something to fall back on at least.

    Lol the guy's an author. I think he can cope without Bond for a while.
    I hope so. Some members here endured near trauma during Brozza's run, if we are to believe their comments.

    I'm one of those fans you're talking about.
    Was so sure Brossa was going to continue in the role after the despicable DAD that i was seriously giving up on the franchise!

    Same here. Thought the degeneration was irreversible.
    Gentlemen, my deepest condolences. I almost joined you in despair after enduring TWINE in the theatre, so I can relate partially.
    bondjames wrote: »
    @stag, all of the Craig films post-CR have been somewhat unconventional, personal and artsy. I just viewed FRWL last night and it was so refreshing to see a clean, crisp & intriguing mystery. One day they will get back to making those I'm sure.

    Oh frwl is so perfect. If only they could make a bond film half as good
    It really is. Connery is just in a different league in that film. I'm tempted to watch DN soon as well just to see the legendary intro scene. Makes you realize how good they once were.

    I mean, if we look at three films, a trilogy so to speak. Dr. No, Frwl, and Goldfinger
    The best set of three films in film history?
    I think so

    In Bond history for sure.

    No im talking all films. Im struggling to think of better trilogies.
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    Posts: 7,136
    bondjames wrote: »
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    The_Donald wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    stag wrote: »
    Controversial I know, and I have no intention of causing offence, but I'm saddened to say I have no interest in the forthcoming Bond film. IMHO although CR was a good (yet overlong) movie, the franchise has deteriorated in terms of the quality of its writing since then.
    I can understand your point of view and sympathize. Is there any franchise out there which can tide you over until Bond regains your trust? It would be terrible not to have something to fall back on at least.

    Lol the guy's an author. I think he can cope without Bond for a while.
    I hope so. Some members here endured near trauma during Brozza's run, if we are to believe their comments.

    I'm one of those fans you're talking about.
    Was so sure Brossa was going to continue in the role after the despicable DAD that i was seriously giving up on the franchise!

    Same here. Thought the degeneration was irreversible.
    Gentlemen, my deepest condolences. I almost joined you in despair after enduring TWINE in the theatre, so I can relate partially.
    bondjames wrote: »
    @stag, all of the Craig films post-CR have been somewhat unconventional, personal and artsy. I just viewed FRWL last night and it was so refreshing to see a clean, crisp & intriguing mystery. One day they will get back to making those I'm sure.

    Oh frwl is so perfect. If only they could make a bond film half as good
    It really is. Connery is just in a different league in that film. I'm tempted to watch DN soon as well just to see the legendary intro scene. Makes you realize how good they once were.

    I mean, if we look at three films, a trilogy so to speak. Dr. No, Frwl, and Goldfinger
    The best set of three films in film history?
    I think so

    In Bond history for sure.

    No im talking all films. Im struggling to think of better trilogies.

    I can think of quite a few to be honest. But is DN-GF a trilogy per se?
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    GoldenGun wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    The_Donald wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    stag wrote: »
    Controversial I know, and I have no intention of causing offence, but I'm saddened to say I have no interest in the forthcoming Bond film. IMHO although CR was a good (yet overlong) movie, the franchise has deteriorated in terms of the quality of its writing since then.
    I can understand your point of view and sympathize. Is there any franchise out there which can tide you over until Bond regains your trust? It would be terrible not to have something to fall back on at least.

    Lol the guy's an author. I think he can cope without Bond for a while.
    I hope so. Some members here endured near trauma during Brozza's run, if we are to believe their comments.

    I'm one of those fans you're talking about.
    Was so sure Brossa was going to continue in the role after the despicable DAD that i was seriously giving up on the franchise!

    Same here. Thought the degeneration was irreversible.
    Gentlemen, my deepest condolences. I almost joined you in despair after enduring TWINE in the theatre, so I can relate partially.
    bondjames wrote: »
    @stag, all of the Craig films post-CR have been somewhat unconventional, personal and artsy. I just viewed FRWL last night and it was so refreshing to see a clean, crisp & intriguing mystery. One day they will get back to making those I'm sure.

    Oh frwl is so perfect. If only they could make a bond film half as good
    It really is. Connery is just in a different league in that film. I'm tempted to watch DN soon as well just to see the legendary intro scene. Makes you realize how good they once were.

    I mean, if we look at three films, a trilogy so to speak. Dr. No, Frwl, and Goldfinger
    The best set of three films in film history?
    I think so

    In Bond history for sure.

    No im talking all films. Im struggling to think of better trilogies.

    I can think of quite a few to be honest. But is DN-GF a trilogy per se?

    It's not a trilogy, it's a series.
  • Posts: 12,474
    After watching it again, I'm still convinced Sean Connery would have been miscast as Bond in OHMSS, and I have zero regrets that George Lazenby was who we got as Bond in that film. I don't know if that is considered controversial, but I just don't think Connery could have turned in the same human performance as Lazenby for that film. Bear in mind I still prefer Connery's Bond overall and believe he was amazing in his films, but I think Lazenby is part of what makes OHMSS so great, and it's hard for me to picture many of the scenes with Connery instead.
  • Posts: 19,339
    FoxRox wrote: »
    After watching it again, I'm still convinced Sean Connery would have been miscast as Bond in OHMSS, and I have zero regrets that George Lazenby was who we got as Bond in that film. I don't know if that is considered controversial, but I just don't think Connery could have turned in the same human performance as Lazenby for that film. Bear in mind I still prefer Connery's Bond overall and believe he was amazing in his films, but I think Lazenby is part of what makes OHMSS so great, and it's hard for me to picture many of the scenes with Connery instead.

    I have always thought the same..i don't think Connery or Moore could have brought it off at the time the film was made.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    I think it would have been a different film with Connery, but I believe he could have done the role justice certainly. He was never asked to play 'vulnerable' so we'll never really know if he could have done it.

    He nailed everything else they threw at him though, so I'm willing to bet he could have done this as well. Just differently.
  • Posts: 12,474
    It's possible he could have done it well, but I can't imagine it being superior to Lazenby. I know many still have not warmed up to him, but I think Lazenby was excellent as Bond, and his romance with Tracy was very convincing to me. Though it would have been cool to see Lazenby do another Bond film or two, it makes OHMSS all the more special that it was a one-off.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,304
    I might've said this already, but I think my relative liking for AVTAK seems pretty controversial. Obviously here on a Bond forum we're more tolerant of all the movies and I've seen a few decently high rankings for Moore's last flick, but generally it's pretty much universally panned and received an appalling 35% on RT (I would also bring up OP's abysmal 42%, but I think we're generally much more favourable towards it on here). I'm not saying it's one of the series' best but it deserves better than the dismal ratings it tends to get.

    While Moore's age and Tanya Roberts are regrettable, I think Moore does a fine job playing Bond in his usual manner (which automatically makes it good) and the movie easily compensates for Stacey with the twin villains in Christopher Walken and Grace Jones, Duran Duran's theme song and one of Barry's finest compositions. Admittedly, most of the film's action doesn't feel fresh in the slightest, and there's a lot of stuntwork for the sake of it. Still, I think few can deny the Golden Gate finale is one of the series' best. I still think it's better than TWMTGG at the very least (by far the most inconsistent film of the franchise) and probably MR (which somehow manages to beat AVTAK in being the most outrageous Bond movie).

    And the soundtrack. And Macnee with Moore, one of the better pairings in the series.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    FoxRox wrote: »
    After watching it again, I'm still convinced Sean Connery would have been miscast as Bond in OHMSS, and I have zero regrets that George Lazenby was who we got as Bond in that film. I don't know if that is considered controversial, but I just don't think Connery could have turned in the same human performance as Lazenby for that film. Bear in mind I still prefer Connery's Bond overall and believe he was amazing in his films, but I think Lazenby is part of what makes OHMSS so great, and it's hard for me to picture many of the scenes with Connery instead.

    If they'd made OHMSS after GF as was originally intended I think Connery would've nailed it. Post-YOLT, no, I think Lazenby was a better bet.
  • Posts: 19,339
    FoxRox wrote: »
    It's possible he could have done it well, but I can't imagine it being superior to Lazenby. I know many still have not warmed up to him, but I think Lazenby was excellent as Bond, and his romance with Tracy was very convincing to me. Though it would have been cool to see Lazenby do another Bond film or two, it makes OHMSS all the more special that it was a one-off.

    Spot on....I think it was meant to be..in all of Connery's films since Bond ,whenever he dies he is the martyr,i have never seen he cradling or mourning someone else in his arms as Lazenby did per se.
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    Posts: 7,136
    Agreed on Lazenby, perfect 007 for a perfect 007 film.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited August 2017 Posts: 6,304
    barryt007 wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    It's possible he could have done it well, but I can't imagine it being superior to Lazenby. I know many still have not warmed up to him, but I think Lazenby was excellent as Bond, and his romance with Tracy was very convincing to me. Though it would have been cool to see Lazenby do another Bond film or two, it makes OHMSS all the more special that it was a one-off.

    Spot on....I think it was meant to be..in all of Connery's films since Bond ,whenever he dies he is the martyr,i have never seen he cradling or mourning someone else in his arms as Lazenby did per se.

    I agree. And Lazenby's Bond seems genuinely afraid and vulnerable in certain scenes, in a way that I have never seen Connery be, in any film. Connery is more like Eastwood, the stoic hero.
  • Posts: 19,339
    echo wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    It's possible he could have done it well, but I can't imagine it being superior to Lazenby. I know many still have not warmed up to him, but I think Lazenby was excellent as Bond, and his romance with Tracy was very convincing to me. Though it would have been cool to see Lazenby do another Bond film or two, it makes OHMSS all the more special that it was a one-off.

    Spot on....I think it was meant to be..in all of Connery's films since Bond ,whenever he dies he is the martyr,i have never seen he cradling or mourning someone else in his arms as Lazenby did per se.

    I agree. And Lazenby's Bond seems genuinely afraid and vulnerable in certain scenes, in a way that I have never seen Connery be, in any film. Connery is more like Eastwood, the stoic hero.

    The fear he shows at the ice rink genuinely passes to the viewer,when he is hunkered down,collar up ,and just watching feet and ice skates and trying to think what to do ,when he knows SPECTRE (at its most scary and powerful imo ,alongside TB) are surrounding him and he has to contact London somehow,is a brilliant and realistic scene of a really scared man .

    The relief when he sees Tracy and the way he blurts out "it's SPECTRE,they're trying to kill me" is almost child-like.

    Only Lazenby could pull that off.
    One of the many reasons that OHMSS is my #1 Bond film.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    The fact Lazenby is genuinely shitting his pants translates effectively.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited August 2017 Posts: 23,883
    How do we know Connery couldn't have pulled it off? He wasn't asked to. He looked pretty concerned when running from Fiona with a bullet in his leg in TB. Surely he could have had brought a bit more of that to the table if asked to?
  • edited August 2017 Posts: 12,837
    Connery would have sunk OHMSS. He was past caring about Bond at that point. I know some fans think the script would have reinvigorated him but I genuinely think his feelings towards Cubby and Harry and how tired he was of the role would have killed any enthusiasm. Lazenby killed it, especially for a first time actor. He was so vulnerable and human in a way Connery could never have been even before he started phoning it in. When he's in danger he looks genuinely scared. You actually fear for him and it makes the action scenes so gripping. But that's not to say he wasn't still badass. So good in the fight scenes and come on, sliding down the ice with the machine gun, and the bit where he side steps the bottle of acid and guns down the scientist? Effortlessly cool.

    Actually this might be controversial. Not only was he better than Connery ever would have been in OHMSS, I think if Lazenby had stayed on and got more comfortable in the role, and done a couple more films with Hunt, he could have actually surprassed Connery in general. To me he's the only Bond actor to really 100% capture Fleming's Bond, and he managed that in his first film when he was still just a model who managed to blag himself the role. Imagine how good he'd have been if he stayed on and worked at it and improved as an actor. He had such good screen presence. The only thing he had against him in OHMSS was that sometimes his line delivery felt a bit wooden but if he'd stayed on that definitely would've improved, and we would have got one of the best Bonds ever. Might have even rivalled Dalton.
    RC7 wrote: »
    Wouldn't change Walken for the world. Bowie would have been Bowie. Walken 'is' Zorin.

    Yeah I agree with this. Love Walken as Zorin. But Bowie as a Bond villain at some point would have been fun to see, especially opposite Moore.
  • Posts: 19,339
    In the whole of the 'what ifs' in the Bond cannon,i would love to know what DAF would have been like with George.....
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    Controversial Opinion: but not about Bond.

    But...

    About hopeful Bond directors of the near future:

    IS VILLENEUVE more a visionary than NOLAN?

    I love Nolan and his films, from MOMENTO onwards..., but...-

    I'm watching THE ARRIVAL and combined with THE ENEMY, THE PRISONER and the flipping-awesome SICARIO.... I believe, IMHO, that Villeneuve is the man to direct a Bond film-- whether DC's last, or a new actor's beginning...

    Man, he almost re-made DR. NO in scenes from the ARRIVAL when the characters had to wash off potential radiation...

    Denis Villeneuve for B25 or B26 with a new actor, or...

    Villeneuve to send Craig away, and be the driving force behind the new Bond for B26. He's class, atmosphere and action-- better than Mendes, and, dare I say it?... Better than Nolan...
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    peter wrote: »
    Controversial Opinion: but not about Bond.

    But...

    About hopeful Bond directors of the near future:

    IS VILLENEUVE more a visionary than NOLAN?

    I love Nolan and his films, from MOMENTO onwards..., but...-

    I'm watching THE ARRIVAL and combined with THE ENEMY, THE PRISONER and the flipping-awesome SICARIO.... I believe, IMHO, that Villeneuve is the man to direct a Bond film-- whether DC's last, or a new actor's beginning...

    Man, he almost re-made DR. NO in scenes from the ARRIVAL when the characters had to wash off potential radiation...

    Denis Villeneuve for B25 or B26 with a new actor, or...

    Villeneuve to send Craig away, and be the driving force behind the new Bond for B26. He's class, atmosphere and action-- better than Mendes, and, dare I say it?... Better than Nolan...

    Perhaps. But better than campbell for the job of closing the Craig arc?
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    I think they should avoid auteur directors for a good long while.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    I'd be ok with Villeneuve for either B25 or B26. I'd be ok with Nolan for any future Bond film.

    @peter I enjoyed Sicario and Prisoners (highly recommended) but couldn't stand Arrival personally. I haven't seen Enemy.

    Somehow I don't think it will be him though. Demange and Mackenzie were rumoured much earlier in the year, so these two are more likely of the three recently mentioned.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,509
    If it's Demange, or MacKenzie, I will be fine; it means we're in for a gritty film. If it's Villeneuve, @bondjames, then we could have grit, combined with big scope vision,...

    This time out, I see them going for a financially cheaper visionary that can still deliver the goods...

    Aside from that, I think there's a genuine argument to debate: Nolan or Villeneuve???
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited August 2017 Posts: 23,883
    Yes @peter, as you noted all 3 of the directors in question are known for gritty films, so this is the direction they are probably headed with for the next one. I agree that B25 is likely going to be a cheaper production than SP, and I wouldn't be surprised if it primarily uses one or two locations (even if it's London or New York) to appease Craig.

    In terms of Villeneuve vs. Nolan, I think it will depend on who the next actor is, since Nolan isn't going to be involved for B25. Someone like Hiddleston, Turner or Hardy could probably work well with either.
  • Posts: 12,474
    I don't really want Nolan to direct Bond, but if they must bring him aboard, I hope they at least let Craig finish his tenure first.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    FoxRox wrote: »
    I don't really want Nolan to direct Bond, but if they must bring him aboard, I hope they at least let Craig finish his tenure first.
    Of course I think this is a given. Nolan is not in the cards for B25 imho.
  • Posts: 684
    Just to kick up some discussion:
    • DN-Sylvia, however briefly she appeared, was Connery's best Bond girl.
    • The best sequence in SP is Bond's arrival at the funeral in Rome through to his leaving Felix's number for Lucia.
    • I really like Samantha Bond as Moneypenny. I much prefer her over Harris. In fact, just because this is the controversial topic and I'm feeling trigger happy, I'll go ahead and say I prefer each of her appearances over all of Maxwell's post-OHMSS, save for DAD -- and only then because the central conceit was so awful (her brief performance made the best of it). She was put to best use in GE, and was given worse material to work with each subsequent film. I wish she'd have had more of a chance, similarly to Cleese as Q actually.
  • Posts: 1,917
    Strog wrote: »
    Just to kick up some discussion:
    • DN-Sylvia, however briefly she appeared, was Connery's best Bond girl.
    • The best sequence in SP is Bond's arrival at the funeral in Rome through to his leaving Felix's number for Lucia.
    • I really like Samantha Bond as Moneypenny. I much prefer her over Harris. In fact, just because this is the controversial topic and I'm feeling trigger happy, I'll go ahead and say I prefer each of her appearances over all of Maxwell's post-OHMSS, save for DAD -- and only then because the central conceit was so awful (her brief performance made the best of it). She was put to best use in GE, and was given worse material to work with each subsequent film. I wish she'd have had more of a chance, similarly to Cleese as Q actually.

    I actually like all the Rome scenes up to the car chase, which is where SP starts to falter. There's some real atmosphere there.

    I like Samantha Bond more than Harris, but I don't like the way they turned t,he character into something confused and not real likeable. One minute she's not so much flirting with Bond as an excuse to make cheap double entendres then in DAD being part of one of the worst comic moments in the series. I do like her chemistry with Judi Dench, though. Their TND byplay is enjoyable.

    Still, I also don't want Moneypenny the action hero either. I'd have preferred the character stay on the sidelines.

  • bondjames wrote: »
    How do we know Connery couldn't have pulled it off? He wasn't asked to. He looked pretty concerned when running from Fiona with a bullet in his leg in TB. Surely he could have had brought a bit more of that to the table if asked to?

    If he wanted it and if they would have let him of course he could have pulled it off.
    What to my mind makes Connery the greatest actor ever to play James Bond is the extreme range of his. Watch almost every of his 1970s movies (including the only ever tragic take on Robin Hood) or - decades later- family business when standing in front of the court explaining to the judge that he probably must have felt so afraid of the police man that he had to severely beat him up.
    Problem is at this point in time he was completely fed up with James Bond. Even if EON had been wise enough to let him have a larger slice of the cake instead of just enforcing their contract, he probably would have felt better of the role but he still must have been very very much annoyed with all the hype around him. I once saw an old interview in black-and-white with him in which he relates that when he is standing at the traffic light in his car girls just jump into his car and want to come with him. He said in a very estranged tone without any trace of frivolity in it "why the hell would they do that?"
    Also, last year I saw an interview with Karin Dor and she relates how he was disgusted with the press and all the other hyper around him. She said he was the most lovely and professional partner to have and he,his wife and she often made out in Tokyo together and that day and night the hotel lobby was full of Japanese girls having little overnight backs with them, waiting that James Bond came to take them up to his room. Can anyone of you imagine a scene like this nowadays?
    I guess it's very hard for us to re-imagine all this hype/hysteria back at those times around Bond/Connery and it seems he was really very tired of it.
Sign In or Register to comment.