It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Consequently, I enjoy that one the most of his four Bond films with Casino Royale as a close second.
1. Skyfall
2. Goldeneye
3. Quantum of Solace
4. Casino Royale
5. TWINE
6. Die Another Day
7. Tomorrow Never Dies
8. SPECTRE (yes, it counts.)
Agree here too about QOS being his top performance, @GoldenGun. Hoping he taps back into it for B25.
He would certainly look the part, but for some reason I cannot see them putting DC in a Naval uniform.
Yes and yes
I don't know if it's equally controversial, but I think George probably had the best M scene, and the best Moneypenny scenes.
With M, I love first of all how many scenes they have together, and how the first is very tense (with some of George's better acting), the second is cordial, but a bit cool, with M wishing to carry on with his leisure time while his agent is bothering him rather than taking his leave, and then the scene with M thinking the case is finished, but Bond once again pushes it forward. A nice mix of tones in that one.
And George and Lois just looked fantastic together. I don't know if Lois was told to turn it up a notch to make it work with the new guy, but the relationship in OHMSS just worked brilliantly as far as I'm concerned.
I said this myself a couple of pages back. I think QOS shows us one of the most realized versions of the character of Bond since the 60's. I think there's a cynical edge that he hasn't really had before or since (some slight exceptions with SF).
Not controversial in the least old son. You are exceptionally cultivated.
Whilst I think OHMSS is Lee's best I also agree with others that I prefer his first 4 to anything in the Brosnan era.
GE and TWINE are decent but TND is just business as usual M giving the mission and DAD sees P&W first squeeze the fat yellow zit of trust issues that has been weeping it's tiresome pus all over M Bond scenes for the past 15 years.
you, sir, are not being controversial at all :)
love the interaction between lazenby and lee in what is my favorite Bond film.
bless your heart
+1
I really don't know which I prefer. The film is definitely better plotted but I think some scenes just work better on the page than on screen (the golf bit, Bond tailing Goldfinger) and there's a lot of cool stuff in the book that was left out. I loved the subplot about Bond "going soft", with killing starting to affect him psychologically, he feels really real and fleshed out in GF. And there's other little moments like Bond doing his own research during a late night in his office, telling Goldfinger to ******, Oddjob eating a cat and Bond firing the bazooka at the train that I wish we'd seen realised on screen (although the finale in the film is probably better overall).
But then the book has a couple of very dated comments about lesbians and a fair bit of racism, and the plot is much better in the film (killing off Tilly early on and making Pussy more of an important character made much more sense since he ends up with Pussy at the end, he basically only manages to contact Felix through sheer luck in the book, robbing Fort Knox is ridiculous but nuking it is actually clever, etc). And it's just hard not to love the film. The DB5. The tux under the wetsuit. "Positively shocking". Bassey's theme.
I really like both for different reasons, but I think the film is better. The novel is great but the film is really special because of how iconic it is. Real pop culture history. Plus what it lacks in the character development the novel has it more than makes up for in story, wit, performances, atmosphere, etc.
There are some similarities though (besides the obvious story and character ones). One thing I really like about the book and the film is they both struck a really good balance in terms of tone. They're both more tongue in cheek and self aware while keeping a real sense of stakes and danger. Love the bit in the book where Bond thinks he's dead and wonders about the potential awkwardness of introducing Tilly to Vesper and the others in heaven.
Post edited for content
I love the scene where M can't restrain his enthusiasm - "Well done, James" - when Bond Bond shows off in the conference with Gogol and Anya as well as his defense of 007 after the debacle with Drax's moved office in Venice in MR and later confidence in him. These are made all the more emotional considering these were Lee's final two films.
Yes, I enjoy that very much. As a kid, I remember being very surprised at hearing M call Bond by his first name. Connery didn't get that privilege!
M's "Well done James" is great in TSWLM, and I'm especially partial to this scene in Moonraker:
"You better take two weeks leave of absence, 007. Do have any thoughts about where you might go?"
"Well, I've always had a hankering to go to Rio, sir."
"I think I can recall your mentioning it. 007, no slip-ups or we're both in trouble."
Lazenby's good in the second scene with Bernard Lee later on, but not so much the first. His delivery of "does this mean you've lost confidence in me?" sticks out to me as being very wooden.
Thunderball also stands out, standing up for 007 against other figures of authority.
My favourite scenes with Judi Dench are the ones from TWINE, not the whole trust-issue stuff from later films but a more layered performance than just giving orders.
We always tend to forget Robert Brown and while he's no Bernard Lee I think he did a more than adequate job replacing him. He had some excellent with Dalton.
The film also lacks the important point that Goldfinger is working for SMERSH, which makes the whole plot far more engaging and interesting. Otherwise I honestly don't care that much about the US' gold supply. Let Goldfinger have his profit, why should I care? Zzzzzzzz...
I really like Brown. He wasn't a pale imitation of Lee as some people suggest. I enjoyed his no-nonsense but less grumpy approach. His appearances in the Dalton films are right up there. And "We're not a country club" is probably a lot of people's favorite M line.
Moore's treatment of the "helpful fellow" in TSWLM.
Best. Badass. Moment.
For a better plot (then again I never read Ian Fleming for the quality of his plot which I suspect he often cared little about), the movie gets so many things wrong: gone is the tension between hero and villain, the absence of SMERSH, the most sinister tone, Goldfinger's introduction (difficult to do in the film but still), Bond being pretty much a bystander by the end of the movie, etc.
I was literally just quoting the book though? Can't say I understand the no swearing rule. Far worse things have been said on here without a single swear word.
The Brosnan era gunbarrel design was perfect and I hate how EON/Kleinman seem to be too stubborn to use it again. The best GB design of the modern era was Spectre and even then, the static Binder design just feels like a step back after we saw it in motion 20 years ago. Maybe they don't want to be associated with the Brosnan films because they're not that highly regarded nowadays? But even if they are ashamed of those films they must see that they got some stuff right back then. They kept Dench on after all and a lot of the production mainstays also worked on the Brosnan movies. Whatever the case I hope they go back to that design, or the same concept but with newer CGI, with Bond 25.
Sorry mate quoting Ian Fleming on a James Bond forum is verboten in case some kiddies see it.
Couldn't agree more.
The Brosnan GB updates the tired looking Binder design perfectly and needed absolutely no messing with. Especially given the abominations they came up with for QOS and SF (CR I'm prepared to give a pass to as it's not a proper GB - although I'm not crazy about the design - and SP was a small step in the right direction but no better than average.
I don't mind the more humorous side to his portrayal, but the intimidation of M belongs in a 90s thriller like Silence of the Lambs or Copycat.
It's like Mendes wanted to make a different movie but was constrained by the Bond formula.