Controversial opinions about Bond films

1453454456458459707

Comments

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    @ThighsOfXenia, I'll never forget coming out of The Bourne Identity in 2001 and being disappointed in so many ways at the state of affairs in Bond-land, particularly with respect to the scores that had been coming out at that point. Arnold just never was for me, although as mentioned, I do much prefer his CR/QoS output to his earlier work. At the risk of offending his fans, he reminds me very much of the worst of the Brosnan period for some reason, and not in a good way.
  • BondAficionadoBondAficionado Former IMDBer
    Posts: 1,890
    GoldenGun wrote: »
    w2bond wrote: »
    Not much will much the themes Barry produced (he's dangerous, Bob sled chase) - he left such a mark that all composers will be compared with him. And that is unfair to Arnold for QoS because it matches and surpasses a few Barry efforts, which while brilliant felt repetitive in the later years (ice chase theme).

    Indeed, but I would even add that several of Arnold greatest scores (essentially all of them) are better than Barry's worst. And I personally rate CR higher than all but one Barry effort.

    I disagree, wouldn’t even say CR is in Arnold’s top 3.

    All of Barry’s scores are miles better than CR in my opinion, as are LALD, TSWLM and GE.

    I prefer bolder, more energetic scores. So even though Barry has the greatest score OAT, if I had to average all of them, David Arnold would probably come out on top. /verycontroversial
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 8,331
    bondjames wrote: »
    @ThighsOfXenia, I'll never forget coming out of The Bourne Identity in 2001 and being disappointed in so many ways at the state of affairs in Bond-land, particularly with respect to the scores that had been coming out at that point. Arnold just never was for me, although as mentioned, I do much prefer his CR/QoS output to his earlier work. At the risk of offending his fans, he reminds me very much of the worst of the Brosnan period for some reason, and not in a good way.

    Same here. I was happy to see him go, even though I liked CR/QoS, what he did before was just.. run of the mill sounds to me. Then we got Newman and I almost started regretting my earlier calls to oust Arnold out, which I voiced on these boards (and the old one). All in all I've grown more weary to either support or disapprove of anyone, but composers in particular.

    Same goes with directors: those who'd seen 'once were worriors' would never ever expect DAD from the same director.
  • Posts: 1,596
    I like Arnold's TND score by and large because you can tell he was working as though it was his one and only shot, so he threw everything and the kitchen sink at it and I think it (mostly) works because of that. Has a propulsion and energy to it. His scores for the last two Brosnan films are obnoxious and, perhaps even worse, indistinguishable from one another (at least in my memory). Two of the worst scores in the series. CR is inoffensive, but nothing great.

    QoS is his best score. Apparently he usually scored from dailies or something like that, whereas Forster forced him to score using only what he could read on the script. The result is a moodier score rather than music that attempts to match every moment beat for beat. Love that score.
  • Posts: 12,522
    My brother shared an interesting controversial opinion: his favorite Bond villain of the Craig era is Greene. Though I prefer Le Chiffre and Silva, Greene is definitely underrated, and still better than Waltz’s awfully average Blofeld.
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 8,331
    Well I wouldn't go as far as making him my favorite, but I do agree (as I've stated here before) that he's underrated. He's very good at beeing the creepy want-it-all.
  • Posts: 1,596
    I think Amalric (who is an incredible actor, in the upper echelon of actors who have worked in the series) does as much as he can with a relatively thin role. I’ve warmed on him some over the years.
  • RemingtonRemington I'll do anything for a woman with a knife.
    Posts: 1,534
    How about this?
    I really like the microgroove design of the CR gun barrel and wish that the rest of the Craig films had it as well. Also, keep Craig walking away after firing in SF and SP. I thought that was really cool in QOS.
  • edited August 2018 Posts: 16,226
    Controversial opinion: the trailers for the Craig Bond films are sub-standard and nowhere near as Bondian as the teaser trailer for GOLDENEYE.


    Remington wrote: »
    How about this?
    I really like the microgroove design of the CR gun barrel and wish that the rest of the Craig films had it as well. Also, keep Craig walking away after firing in SF and SP. I thought that was really cool in QOS.

    I kind of like that design as well for CR. I actually think they should have filmed one with him walking for CR in that same outfit to be used in subsequent films rather than reshooting his gunbarrel every time. His pose for CR was excellent, IMO.
    I also think they should have maintained a black and white gunbarrel for Craig's era.
  • BMW_with_missilesBMW_with_missiles All the usual refinements.
    Posts: 3,000
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Controversial opinion: the trailers for the Craig Bond films are sub-standard and nowhere near as Bondian as the teaser trailer for GOLDENEYE.

    Agreed. I'd say the quality of trailers in general has gone down. The narrated trailer is a lost art.
  • Posts: 16,226
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Controversial opinion: the trailers for the Craig Bond films are sub-standard and nowhere near as Bondian as the teaser trailer for GOLDENEYE.

    Agreed. I'd say the quality of trailers in general has gone down. The narrated trailer is a lost art.

    Yes. Not so much just Bond but films in general all seem to have trailers edited in a similar style. I miss the great voice over narration.
  • RemingtonRemington I'll do anything for a woman with a knife.
    Posts: 1,534
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    Controversial opinion: the trailers for the Craig Bond films are sub-standard and nowhere near as Bondian as the teaser trailer for GOLDENEYE.


    Remington wrote: »
    How about this?
    I really like the microgroove design of the CR gun barrel and wish that the rest of the Craig films had it as well. Also, keep Craig walking away after firing in SF and SP. I thought that was really cool in QOS.

    I kind of like that design as well for CR. I actually think they should have filmed one with him walking for CR in that same outfit to be used in subsequent films rather than reshooting his gunbarrel every time. His pose for CR was excellent, IMO.
    I also think they should have maintained a black and white gunbarrel for Craig's era.

    Agreed. GE has possibly the best trailer of the series.

    I like your idea about having all Craig's gunbarrels being B&W. Would've been great.
  • RoadphillRoadphill United Kingdom
    Posts: 984
    This is probably a controversial opinion. Goldfinger is now my least favourite of the 60's Bond films.
  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing Long Neck Ice Cold Beer Never Broke My Heart
    Posts: 4,602
    Roadphill wrote: »
    This is probably a controversial opinion. Goldfinger is now my least favourite of the 60's Bond films.

    I'd give that notion to Thunderball for me.
  • Posts: 19,339
    Roadphill wrote: »
    This is probably a controversial opinion. Goldfinger is now my least favourite of the 60's Bond films.

    Same here.
  • Posts: 7,507
    Roadphill wrote: »
    This is probably a controversial opinion. Goldfinger is now my least favourite of the 60's Bond films.


    It is not that controversial. Personaly I'd give it a slight nod over YOLT, but I see your point, definitely.
  • Posts: 15,229
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Roadphill wrote: »
    This is probably a controversial opinion. Goldfinger is now my least favourite of the 60's Bond films.

    Same here.

    YOLT for me, but then Goldfinger is I think one of the lesser good/great films, if that makes sense. I find it very static.
  • edited August 2018 Posts: 7,507
    This has already been debated to death on other threads... but I think the last third of Goldfinger is both nonsensical and slightly tedious. It just drags for me and I never feel the level of suspense I know I am supposed to. The established conception is that the film version drastically improves on the plot from the novel. I am not so sure...

    That said I am very fond of the first part of the film. The low ranking is more due to the generally excellent level of the 60's films.
  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing Long Neck Ice Cold Beer Never Broke My Heart
    Posts: 4,602
    jobo wrote: »
    This has already been debated to death on other threads... but I think the last third of Goldfinger is both nonsensical and slightly tedious. It just drags for me and I never feel the level of suspense I know I am supposed to. The established conception is that the film version drastically improves on the plot from the novel. I am not so sure...

    That said I am very fond of the first part of the film. The low ranking is more due to the generally excellent level of the 60's films.

    Couldn't have said it any better. Up until Bond arrives in Kentucky, it's top notch. The rest drags, as almost they ran out of steam. It's also the 2nd lowest running time as well. I mean close if not more than 5 minutes is spent watching Oddjob drive and kill Solo and watching the car crush and then drive back.
  • edited August 2018 Posts: 11,189
    I like GF a lot but I don't think its more comic laid-back approach holds up particularly well today.

    The final in the plane is also ridiculous.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Ludovico wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Roadphill wrote: »
    This is probably a controversial opinion. Goldfinger is now my least favourite of the 60's Bond films.

    Same here.

    YOLT for me, but then Goldfinger is I think one of the lesser good/great films, if that makes sense. I find it very static.
    I agree on both points. These films overall lack a bit of tension in comparison to the Young entries and OHMSS. Connery is less lethal and deadly (which is where he was at his best imho). It doesn't help that GF slows down to a snail's pace mid stream and doesn't improve until the Oddjob fight (which is great). A bit too American for my tastes towards the end as well. With YOLT, I love it up to the wedding. Then I just tune out.

    Perhaps controversially, I'll take DAF over either of them at this point. At least I have a lot of fun with it, silly moments and all.
  • RoadphillRoadphill United Kingdom
    Posts: 984
    @bondjames now that is controversial!

    I think DAF in some aspects is my least favourite Bond film.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    No doubt controversial @Roadphill, especially given how GF is held in such high regard by hardcore and the masses.

    I used to really dislike DAF for ages. Recently I've begun to see it in a new light. I'm not sure if it's due to my longing for a lighter touch or not, but there's something about the film that I just enjoy. It's zany, like all the Hamilton entries. The early 70's colourful eccentricity which is in DAF/LALD/TMWTGG is something I like. Moreover, I've realized that the Blofeld/Bond banter in this film is something that has always stayed with me throughout the years. Gray and Connery worked well together.

    Objectively I rank DAF below GF and YOLT, but in terms of subjective enjoyment I like it more.
  • RoadphillRoadphill United Kingdom
    Posts: 984
    @bondjames Fair enough.

    I have tried to warm to it over the years but I just can't, no matter how hard I try.

    God forgive me, I even enjoy DAD more. I know I will get crucified for that!
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Roadphill wrote: »
    God forgive me, I even enjoy DAD more. I know I will get crucified for that!
    Nothing wrong with that. I've warmed to DAD immeasurably of late too. One has to be in the right frame of mind for it. A few beers don't hurt either (dulls the critical senses!).
  • Posts: 15,229
    I really dislike DAF, don't enjoy it, but I grudgingly admit that it was what the franchise needed. I don't think they could have afforded another OHMSS or another Lazenby.
  • Posts: 19,339
    Ludovico wrote: »
    I really dislike DAF, don't enjoy it, but I grudgingly admit that it was what the franchise needed. I don't think they could have afforded another OHMSS or another Lazenby.

    Exactly,just like TSWLM,GE,and CR...all films that came along at the right time.
  • edited August 2018 Posts: 17,819
    Birdleson wrote: »
    These days it's for more controversial on here to still have GF ranked #1, as I and a few others do. Funny how it so frequently gets mentioned as controversial when people place it outside of their Top Five or Ten; that's become the norm. It still manages to come in fourth in most of our more comprehensive polls or amalgam,action of rankings.

    This is very good point. It's a film that often changes it's place in the ranking for me, with each viewing. Usually around top five-eight.
  • Posts: 12,522
    GF is way too much fun to drop out of my Top 10. For me, the first 3 Connery films are all practically guaranteed Top 10 Bond films. I know GF isn’t as popular here as it is in general, but it remains special to me. As of now, still my #1 Connery film.
  • Posts: 16,226
    GF is consistently my #1 Bond film of all. Occasionally, DN, FRWL or TB may take that spot for a few days, but GF always seems to climb back to that spot.
    I think it well deserves it's iconic status. Had it NOT become the blockbuster mega hit of 1964, I believe the series might have ended once the books had run out.
    I most certainly place GF above, say CR which, IMO is a bit overrated. In terms of truthfulness to it's source, I'd say CR is no more faithful to Fleming's novel than GF was. I'd go as far to say that the film version of GF improves upon the novel whereas to me CR does not.
    In addition, I love the Kentucky section of the film. Even when locked up, the Connery Bond of GF is a pleasure to watch. He personifies cool throughout the film.

    For those who whine that the special effects at the end of the film are sub standard. Yes, I agree the model work isn't exactly Derek Meddings level. However, there's great news for newer audiences. The Blu ray edition, by use of 21st century CGI has erased the wires from the plane! Thanks to revisionist technology, the wires are nowhere to be seen.
    Personally I prefer the pre-Lowery version, but that's a minor quibble. Either way, GF is a fun Bond film to watch, IMO, and holds up marvelously.
Sign In or Register to comment.