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
MR over TSWLM???
This is the controversial opinions thread, right?
A reason I put MR ahead: In TSWLM they try to add some conflict between Bond and Anya over what happened with her boyfriend, but I always had a hard time buying that due to Barbara Bach not being a good enough actress to sell the scene with her giving Bond the warning that she'll kill him.
In MR, there's none of that business. Lois Chiles may not be a master thespian, but at least the filmmakers know better to just give her nothing more than a bit of fun banter with Moore, and he looks like he's having more fun with their repartee than he did in TSWLM. To me this is just an example of why I find MR better: It's more confident and assured of itself. It's the filmmakers running a victory lap after having TSWLM be a huge success. It's very much a lark of a film, and that's why I find it more entertaining. Someone once described it as the cinematic equivalent of a pantomime production and that makes 1000% sense given it features a double taking pigeon.
And that pigeon is GLORIOUS.
I prefer the Bond girls, story, henchmen, and Moore’s performance in TSWLM as well. I’d say I prefer the score and main villain in MR, and then a lot of other elements are near-equals (action, PTS, locations, etc.). Both are classic epic-scale Bond adventures for sure! No one did “big” Bond better than Lewis Gilbert.
My man! These are more reasons why Moonraker is the superior film. I have also said before on this forum that I feel like this is Moore's best performance in the role. He never gave us a bad performance, but to me he really hits his straps in MR.
The opening sequence of Moonraker has to be one of the best in the series and the fact that it was done for real makes it even more enthralling. Don't get me wrong, Roger skiing down the mountain to Hamlisch's disco score in a yellow ski suit is undeniably iconic, but Moonraker takes it to an entirely different level, IMO. I've also always found Stromberg to be rather bland as a villain, whereas Lonsdale's portrayal of Drax is pure indulgence. The way he speaks alone is better then anything that Stromberg brings to the table.
Everything in Moonraker is more refined in terms of outlandish thinking when approaching a Bond film. It's pure, unadulterated fun. That being said, it does have some more darker, Flemingesque moments such as the Centrifuge or Corinne's death.
I think this is one of the most controversial things I've read here! I'd never call that pigeon glorious, it's actually one of the things of the Moore era I don't like. Same with the fish out of the car in tswlm. To me both films are on par. Both leading ladies are dead in the water, both villains over the top (that's a good thing here), both plots basically the same. Funny thing is that though MR may feel like the most unlikely film, it's probably Tswlm with the most 'unrealism' considering the technical difficulties to overcome.
Controversial opinion. I ABSOLUTELY LOVE Jonathan Pryce in TND.
The story goes that the chap who actually flies the jetpack refused to do it without a helmet, on safety grounds, so they had to have Connery wear one. They could have picked a cooler one though, I agree!
Very controversial. I think he’s one of the weakest Villains in the series. Weak, wet, pantomime, unthreatening and no chemistry whatsoever with Paris Carver.
+1.
First, a few assumptions. Let's say that NTTD is definitely Craig's final Bond film, and that it does well. Let's also say that EON agrees that you can't really do more 'dark and intense' than Craig did, and that Austin Powers effectively parodied the high camp approach to death, so the next actor will aim to blend a bit of ruthlessness with more charm and wit than Craig. Bringing back the humor, escapism, and fun in a measured way.
If this is case, surely it rules out people like Nolan and Villeneuve, who specialize in the kind of palette and story that EON is moving away from?
Therefore: why not Taika Waititi as director for B26? He's proved he's able to play within the structure of a big franchise while leaving a personal stamp on things. And he definitely delivers colour, humour and action well.
I never saw TSWLM until it's network television debut, which left me rather underwhelmed. It also didn't help that many over the years dismissed MR as being awful and TSWLM played up.
It leads to one of my great personal Bond what ifs: I was supposed to see TSWLM at the cinema in '77 but had a chance to go see a Cincinnati Reds baseball game, they were defending world champs at the time, and chose to do that. I wonder if it would've made me a bigger Bond fan and if it would've been a favorite instead of middling as it is now.
Taika Waititi would be a wonderful get for EON if they want to take the series in a lighter route.
I think the way he delivered a funny, entertaining take on Thor while managing to respect the character set up in the first 2 films was great. Could act as a bit of a blue print for how to tweak Bond into a lighter take if a change of tone is indeed what EON go for.
A Bond villain isn’t supposed to be funny? It’s not Austin Powers!
Birdleson: Yes!! Thank you I'm glad I'm not the only one who finds Charles Grey to be great, actually that's probably my controversial opinion: Charles Grey is the best Blofeld by a wide margin
I too love Stromberg. he is one of the highlights of the film.
They can have wit, sure. But not an outright ‘pantomime dame’ like Carver.
If that’s the case media moguls make for a very poor Bond Villain then. I thought Brosnan’s Bond had chemistry with Paris and the ‘former fling’ element was a decent plot point.