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
Unrealistic.Ridiculous.Those are words that come to mind regarding the plot of Skyfall to me.Not to mention Bond surviving being shot ( twice! ) falling from a massive height at high speed into a river and drowning with no explanation!
Bond surviving in SF is definitely OTT, but at least it is not as unsensical and ridiculously cartoonish as the bullet in the head which makes its victim "increasingly stronger until the day he dies"... ;)
Fair points.
@goldenswissroyale in terms of great moments of spectacle you've got a good point. I'd add the 360 degree barrel turn stunt as still right up there with some of the best stunts in the series, even with the whistle! I also love the whole 'funfair' sequences and the rescue of Bond from the karate school but that's me watching them with my 'kid-tinted glasses' on i.e. I have such fond memories of being really excited by this watching it on TV as a child, that I still get that excited feeling watching as an adult. Being more objective I'd have to discount them now!
More importantly, does this mean that you are reassessing your 'Bond rankings' and Moonraker is no longer right at the bottom? I live in hope .... :) :D
Well... (and I can't believe I'm going to defend TMWTGG a little here, it's in my bottom three Bond films ranking) there were some other entries in the series that were light on action and/or spectacle. It's a clumsy film for other reasons, some of the same problems virtually every Moore-era Bond film has (DAF too). At least the car barrel roll was cool, as was Christopher Lee.
(I'm gonna get flack for this, but I don't find Ekland very attractive. She is a nuisance in the film for me.)
It is a nice little movie but not enough for a “real“ bond adventure. I mean, there isn't a real villain (Scaramanga respects Bond and doesn't want to kill him). Goodnight's bottom is more dangerous than Scaramanga and Nick Nack. But this is probably not controversial and I leave it that way. Sorry Max, MR is still my least favoured Eon entry.
Still, I find it hard to imagine a faithful adaptation of the novel and, above all, I really like the time capsule that is the movie we finally got; it gives it a special feel that I would be hard-pressed to associate with a more dramatic and depressed revenge-themed narrative.
I suppose when I watch it, I'm watching the build up to it as well, the 'oh no, Bond's on the wrong side of the river' .... how will he get to the other side? ... and the fact that JW articulates what I'm thinking, including realising at the same time as I do that he's going to jump the bridge. Like I say though this is the 10 year old me watching this!
:)
It is over far to quickly. The jump from different angles in slow motion would surely have been more effective. Far be it from me to tell Guy Hamilton how to direct a scene!
Her character is a nuisance but i think that was intentional.Bond gets pretty fed up with her throughout the film '' JUST HIT EVERY DAMN BUTTON WILL YOU!! ''
She is extremely hot though,especially in that bikini.
On a related subject, i dont find Lea Seadoux all that attractive.Not saying shes ugly or anything,she just doesnt do it for me.
Generally, I personallly don’t find Connery’s ladies particularly attractive to myself , apart from Luciana Paluzzi. Ursula Andress, Honor Blackman; Claudine Auger don’t do it for me. Daniela Bianchi is pretty but I don’t find her hot.
Diana Rigg is stunning in OHMSS and then Roger has an absolute bonanza of amazing beauties in his first three outings - Jane Seymour; Britt Ekland; Maud Adams: Barbara Bach
Specifically it was Peter Hunt that was insistent on sticking close to the novel. In early drafts for OHMSS when it was originally planned to be made as the fourth film, coming after GF, Tracy actually lived at the end. It also began with Bond rescuing Tracy in the ocean by driving his car into and revealing to be a car submarine.
So it's very clear that EON was very willing to go astray from what Fleming wrote in the novel, given how loosely adapted the films YOLT, DAF, LALD, TMWTGG, TSWLM, MR, OP, and AVTAK were. Only FYEO and TLD were close to faithful adaptations.
Goodnight is the Bond series' answer to the klutzy spy heroines that Stella Stevens and Sharon Tate portrayed in Dean Martin's Matt Helm series. This was made during the comedic era of Bond and Moore's Bond gets annoyed with her onscreen(not unlike Martin's Helm did with the ladies I mentioned) so she never bothered me. I get far more annoyed at Stacey Sutton's antics a decade later.
The late '60s were a time of despair and anti-heroes, and that is reflected in the films (Bonnie and Clyde, Midnight Cowboy, etc.).
OHMSS benefited by being a product of its time as well, when filmmakers did not shy away from downer endings.
Is Goodnight supposed to be an actual field operative though? I'm under the impression she's supposed to be a secretary or other office employee rather than an actual agent. Also, Scaramanga's villainous plot is on a much milder and lower scale than many others she could've gotten involved in so I'll cut her more slack. My controversial opinion is that Judi Dench's M shows a lot more incompetence in TWINE, getting tricked by Elektra and falling into her clutches when she's supposed to be the actual head of the MI6 organization.
In truth I can't imagine Fleming making any character, man or woman, villain or ally, that stupid and incompetent. "Lets laugh looking how stupid she is" was not exactly Fleming's style...
I would also level that criticism at DAF and LALD. Virtually no spectacle in 3 films in a row.
No wonder Cubby broke the bank for TSWLM.
The Hamilton/Mankiewicz films are definitely a dark chapter in Bond history. It was a pretty toxic partnership as far as I am concerned...
Bond makes so many dick moves: shoving the boy off the boat; kicking his opponent in the face at the dojo; turning the gun on the gun maker; shoving Nick Nack in a suitcase; manhandling Andrea to get information.
And then you’ve Goodnight; Sherrif Pepper; and the worst crime of all is the way the film sets up and plays the incredible corkscrew car jump (I sure am boy)
Despite all this, I really enjoy the movie, but I’d struggle to explain why
Yeah, absolutely. I truly dislike DAF, but despite what I said LALD and TMWTGG still have their charms. They really do look cheap compared to many of the previous, and following Bond films, though.