Controversial opinions about Bond films

1362363365367368707

Comments

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Birdleson wrote: »
    Nothing tops those first four (and OHMSS) Connery/M interactions for me. But I will place Brosnan/Dench second.
    I agree.
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    Posts: 7,136
    I am not known as the biggest fan of Daniel Craig's Bond but in my opinion his best and most Bondian performance is in Quantum of Solace.

    Consequently, I enjoy that one the most of his four Bond films with Casino Royale as a close second.
  • BondAficionadoBondAficionado Former IMDBer
    Posts: 1,890
    Judi Dench's performances as M:

    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.)
  • Posts: 684
    bondjames wrote: »
    Birdleson wrote: »
    Nothing tops those first four (and OHMSS) Connery/M interactions for me. But I will place Brosnan/Dench second.
    I agree.
    Also agree. My favorite of all is probably the M scene from DN. It's simple but it conveys so much about their dynamic.
    GoldenGun wrote: »
    I am not known as the biggest fan of Daniel Craig's Bond but in my opinion his best and most Bondian performance is in Quantum of Solace.

    Consequently, I enjoy that one the most of his four Bond films with Casino Royale as a close second.
    Agree here too about QOS being his top performance, @GoldenGun. Hoping he taps back into it for B25.
  • Posts: 12,526
    Murdock wrote: »
    He could pull off the look. I randomly came across this photoshopped image of him.
    L0q4bxpl.jpg

    He would certainly look the part, but for some reason I cannot see them putting DC in a Naval uniform.
  • Strog wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Birdleson wrote: »
    Nothing tops those first four (and OHMSS) Connery/M interactions for me. But I will place Brosnan/Dench second.
    I agree.
    Also agree. My favorite of all is probably the M scene from DN. It's simple but it conveys so much about their dynamic.
    GoldenGun wrote: »
    I am not known as the biggest fan of Daniel Craig's Bond but in my opinion his best and most Bondian performance is in Quantum of Solace.

    Consequently, I enjoy that one the most of his four Bond films with Casino Royale as a close second.
    Agree here too about QOS being his top performance, @GoldenGun. Hoping he taps back into it for B25.

    Yes and yes
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    Posts: 1,711
    GetCarter wrote: »
    Brosnan's Bond had by far the best interactions with M.

    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.


  • GoldenGun wrote: »
    I am not known as the biggest fan of Daniel Craig's Bond but in my opinion his best and most Bondian performance is in Quantum of Solace.

    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).
  • Posts: 7,507
    Sean har the best Moneypenny scenes. No contest!
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    GetCarter wrote: »
    Brosnan's Bond had by far the best interactions with M.

    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.


    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.

  • Posts: 15,125
    For all its flaws I find the novel GF to be superior to the movie.
  • edited September 2017 Posts: 386
    GetCarter wrote: »
    Brosnan's Bond had by far the best interactions with M.

    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.


    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
  • Posts: 7,434
    GetCarter wrote: »
    GetCarter wrote: »
    Brosnan's Bond had by far the best interactions with M.

    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.


    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
  • edited September 2017 Posts: 12,837
    Ludovico wrote: »
    For all its flaws I find the novel GF to be superior to the movie.

    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
  • Posts: 1,917
    Despite much comic interaction during the era, does anybody else appreciate the interactions Lee's M and Moore's Bond have in TSWLM and MR?

    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.
  • mattjoesmattjoes Julie T. and the M.G.'s
    Posts: 7,021
    BT3366 wrote: »
    Despite much comic interaction during the era, does anybody else appreciate the interactions Lee's M and Moore's Bond have in TSWLM and MR?

    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!
  • ForYourEyesOnlyForYourEyesOnly In the untained cradle of the heavens
    edited September 2017 Posts: 1,984
    Moore's Bond always had a warmer and more personal relationship with M. In his first four outings, his repartees with Bernard Lee are honestly as good as Connery's in my opinion. They're just of a different stock, just for the sake of fitting in better with Moore's films.

    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."


  • Moore and Brosnan are also the only ones to be referred to as M's "best agent," I believe.
  • edited September 2017 Posts: 11,189
    GetCarter wrote: »
    GetCarter wrote: »
    Brosnan's Bond had by far the best interactions with M.

    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.


    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

    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.
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    Posts: 7,136
    Nothing will ever come close to Bernard Lee's M and I agree his interactions with Lazenby are the best.

    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.
  • edited September 2017 Posts: 7,507
    Regarding Goldfinger, I think the novel is far better plotted than the film. It does not depend on the akward and lazily written cliff hanger that PG saves the day after being seduced raped on to the good side. It is a mundane solution to the problem and seems like it is written by a child!

    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...
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    Posts: 1,711
    GoldenGun wrote: »

    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.

    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.
  • Posts: 15,125
    Ludovico wrote: »
    For all its flaws I find the novel GF to be superior to the movie.

    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 go fuck himself, 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.

    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.
  • edited September 2017 Posts: 12,837
    I think SMERSH's absence is more of a series wide issue to be fair, I don't think you can single one film out based on a decision they made at the very beginning (I think FRWL suffers much more from SMERSH's absence because you actually see them in that book and they're much more menacing than SPECTRE). I'm just glad they didn't make him a SPECTRE agent, that got really boring by the end of the Connery era.
    Post edited for content

    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.
  • This probably isn't all too controversial but the discussion on the Everything Or Nothing thread about the gunbarrel put it in my head.

    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.
  • CASINOROYALECASINOROYALE Somewhere hot
    Posts: 1,003
    Surprisingly many people that I have met over the years say that Dalton is the worst Bond/actor. His Bond felt real to me though.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    Post edited for content

    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.

    Sorry mate quoting Ian Fleming on a James Bond forum is verboten in case some kiddies see it.
    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.

    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.
  • edited September 2017 Posts: 386
    Javier Bardem's performance as Silva doesn't belong in a Bond movie.

    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.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Surprisingly many people that I have met over the years say that Dalton is the worst Bond/actor. His Bond felt real to me though.
    His Bond certainly felt the most 'real' and 'human' to me as well, but I get that a lot about him too. Most I've met either haven't seen his films or don't like his portrayal.
Sign In or Register to comment.