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
Bang on! Craig is a mixture of Connery and Dalton. No two ways about it. Obviously with a modern update.
Dalton's arrival is what really super ignited my interest in the franchise. I was longing for a Bond that would take itself more seriously and got it. Sadly not for long as some unfortunate legal business robbed a truly interesting era.
No question, Dalton would have added even more to Bond lore in a 3rd and 4th film. The man is a seriously talented actor of the British stage and Cubby was smart in seeing those qualities since 1968! Dana Broccoli too!
I think it's obvious that he's been inspired by Dalton. I don't get the Connery comparisons though to be honest. I suppose they're similar with how they deliver the one liners, but other than that I don't really see it.
Agreed^ It's also their presence; some Bond actors have confidence because the scripts tell us that they do. But with Craig and Connery they totally sell it. Also, like Connery, Craig's Bond can be a bit of an unapologetic selfish bastard at times.
Image wise and body language, Craig is more Steve McQueen meets Jason Statham. I see no Connery in how he moves or even talks. Just watched Connery today and physically there is no similarity apart from they have eyes, a nose, a mouth and legs as well as arms. :)
Craig brings more attention to himself than Connery. Just look at Craig's gun barrel walk. I would say that Craig comes across bigger headed than Connery. Connery is more economical with his movements and has a too unique style.
Craig has a similar dryness of delivery in terms of one liners to Connery hence why I said Connery. The Daltonisms are with the depth he brings to the role and more realism.
Incredibly handsome men like Brosnan, Connery and Dalton don't need to do peacock to sell themselves to the opposite sex. Craig is just not in the same league as them in terms of looks so he needs swagger boost. Of course all three are very different Bonds. But Pierce is total class in his first two especially. TND is a supreme nailing of his style.
Take Clive Owen. He is less swaggery than Craig, but more women I meet fancy him nevertheless.
If Brosnan employed even more swagger it would make him look too arrogant because his looks are so strong already. He does not need to. You are sold the minute you see him. He is an archetypal James Bond period despite many naysayers these days.
Craig has a very unique take on the role and that is a compliment. A lot of it is different to what has been done before. I really like some elements but I am cemented in how I see Bond image. I am just too used to the others and long in the tooth.
A Brosnan is more my idea of Bond image or a Dalton as well as Connery. Those three do me nicely! Others may differ but I know what I like in a Bond.
Craig may be a bit of Dalton and Connery together, but the fact of the matter is, the two Bond's before him are still out in front as to who really deserves to be considered 'Best Bond' I wish they would omit any humor from his Bond also, in that it simply doesn't work for him, but it did become more prevalent with this years release you would have seen
Weren't you one of those who wanted more humour in Craig's films? saying QoS had no whatsoever? I'm not quite sure it was you too, but I distinctly remember many members saying so. Therefore I don't understand your last comment (and completely disagree, I find Craig to be one of the best when it comes to the humour, it is more British now then it has ever been).
Furthermore I think we've seen Brosnan (GE) and Sean (YOLT) in similar nakedness as Craig. Only these days there's more attention for it as women speak out more. Which is fine by me.
Just before hiatus, OHMSS PM'd me with an excellent question that we should all agree upon an answer for regarding the Onatopp character in GoldenEye, and how we should consider her.
Certainly that she should be in the villain category is a no-brainer. As far as the general women category, that's the bigger question. The women category should be, in my opinion, reserved for a female character Bond has been with. On that score, he was not with Onatopp and based on the criteria, only Natalya and the girl M sent out to evaluate him should be considered. However I know we have different ideas, so I'd like to get a consensus on this so that the reviews are as uniform as possible.
We are still missing 2 reviews at this time to wrap the prior ratings, so now would be a good time for them to appear :)
I will turn in my TLD review today, I do promise. Thanks for helping us get back on track. This is my favorite thread.
As long as Die Another Day comes off worse, we won't mind. :)
I was going to rank her in the villians category myself.
With that said, how do we rank Elektra, Cigar Girl and Miranda? Elektra and weren't villians throughout their respective films.
Also, when we get to Skyfall, what category do we put Eve in?
Onatopp = villain. Not a Bond girl. Elektra's going to be a bit of poseur, though I'd have to say Bond Girl as James does get to sleep with her.
"Better make that two ..."
BOND - 5 out of 5 From the first moment when we see his face, as he turns while hanging on the side of the Rock (what a classic shot!), I felt like "Yes! It's James Bond ..." Every good Bond vibe was right there for me, and this feeling was only further cemented by the thrilling PTS, and continued throughout the entire film. Timothy Dalton did not just look the part; he had plenty of depth and style and charisma. Not the charisma we were used to from Roger's Bond, but nor did he copy Connery. Dalton was his own man and his own Bond, harkening back to the novels. I, unlike others, did not know much about Dalton at all. So I went in with an open mind and hopeful he would move the series forward. I was hoping for a Bond that I could relate to back in the books I had read. Needless to say, I was really satisfied with Dalton as Bond, and this first role was a great start in a very good Bond film. Because he was, and is, different from the other Bonds, I am going to go on a bit more here; bear with me.
Dalton wasn't a glib, too smooth, barely scathed Bond; he wasn't just a pretty face who could fight; he wasn't in any way over the hill or bored (indeed, he was in prime condition all around) - he was confident, strong, rugged yet really handsome with a charming smile and simmering emotions that bubbled to the surface at times. There was a layer of seriousness and dedication always just under the surface with Dalton. You never forgot this wasn't a game; there was a deadly earnest underpinning to his Bond, at times almost like a clock ticking. He went his own way ("Stuff my orders!") and you knew he meant it. You always knew he was thinking; there was never anything superficial to me about Timothy Dalton's James Bond. And he could kick ass. What more could I want? (Just a couple of more films with him, that's all ...)
WOMEN- 4.5 out of 5 It's all about Maryam D'Abo as Kara, and fortunately for the film she rises to the occasion. This is a quite different kind of Bond girl, and made all the more crucial because the other women are barely there, a lot was riding on her shoulders to carry this off. I like her a lot as Kara. She seemed very real to me -someone who was an artist and rather gullible, a woman who has gotten in over her head. She had some innocence and vulnerability that in no way came across as dumb, empty-headed, or just a bimbo. I think she seems so natural with Dalton - I love their chemistry, their relationship and attraction grows beautifully and appropriately throughout the film. It never seems forced or unlikely. I haven't seen D'Abo in anything else, but I am so glad she was chosen for this role. A believable, lovely Bond girl who helped make this movie shine. Were there other women? Such minor backdrop roles, I don't even think worth mentioning actually. Well, Julie Wallace as Roskia was fun, helping to distract the supervisor as Bond sent Purshkin along the pipeline.
VILLAINS - 3.5 out of 5 Well, here is a weaker part of the film, in my opinion. I have always enjoyed Jeroen Krabbé, but feel that Georgi Koskov was just a big goofy, obviously lying jerk who only wants the good things in life and is really not a threatening presence. One wonders how he could have become a Soviet general. He does provide humor, though. So that's okay; just no menacing villain here - except for the deadly silent killer, Necros - superbly played by Andreas Wisniewski. Necros has ice in his veins, is as physically fit as Red Grant and perhaps as psycho (but doesn't really seem crazy; he's just doing his job very well and doesn't mind killing); a superb, efficient, and obviously well trained killer. His attack on the mansion was well done (yet I couldn't help thinking that at a high security place, wouldn't they go buy their own milk rather than have anyone bring it in?). Whittaker is amusing and rather just a joke; I did not find him threatening. I thought he was annoying. The jailer (should I put him in villains?) as played by Ken Sharrock was truly sadistic, and we instantly felt he was a brutal pig who enjoyed torturing the inmates. Fortunately, he gets what's coming to him pretty quickly. Overall, if we didn't have Necros, this film would have been too lightweight in the villain category for sure.
HUMOR- 4 out of 5 Humor was not a big part of this film, but what was there I liked. Some people felt that Timothy was rather awkward with one liners. I didn't feel any awkwardness in the film. I loved the cello/violin line, and sometimes just the look on his face as he reacted to things (like during the ride in the cello) made me smile. No big humor throughout, but mostly, I think the humor was fit in appropriately and was not over the top and Dalton was fine. So I am rating the humor rather high because it was just right for me. I was glad there weren't many set ups just for one-liners or too cheesy lines. This was not a Bond McLite film.
SADISM - 3 out of 5 I cannot think of anything sadistic other than the jailer and Necros, but keep in mind that not much of their brutality was actually shown in the film. When Saunders is killed, all we see is that the shattered glass shards on the ground are red. So there is not an obvious strong sadism to this film. Which is fine with me, actually.
MUSIC- 4 out of 5 A lovely theme song, though not one of my favorites, it fits well. But really the whole rest of the music in the film feels so appropriate and right. A smooth, masterful, lovely effort by Barry (and I say that as someone who simply enjoys music, not as any kind of music expert).
ACTION - 4 out of 5 Lots of action, some great scenes indeed, yet all kept the story moving along. I really like that, the film builds nicely. Of course the great PTS, with Bond clinging to the roof of the flaming jeep loaded with explosives, the snow chase with the cello, the Necros fight at the mansion/safe house. So many moments had tension, too, a well as action (the fairgrounds), etc. All building to where Bond and Kara are in Afghanistan at the airbase. The unforgettable fight in the cargo plane, with Bond and Necros dangling from that cargo net, and then the very suitable killing of Whittaker. Plenty of good action and well delivered throughout.
LOCATIONS - 3.5 out of 5 Vienna was well used but I would have like to have seen even more. The alpine chase, off to the desert and Whittaker's villa. Not outstanding locations, but all served the story well.
GADGETS - 4 out of 5 A great Aston Martin loaded with everything an agent could need and more, the array of fun gadgets in Q's lab (the huge "ghetto blaster" is a blast from the past, eh?), and notably the key ring - which plays an important role in the film. Fine gadgets from the wonderful, relaxed looking Q.
SUPPORTING CAST- 4.5 out of 5 For Dalton's first Bond film, he had a wonderful array of supporting actors. This film is helped a lot by the entire group. First to mention, one of my favorites for sure, is John Rhys-Davies as Gen. Pushkin. He's great! Not so menacing, here he is not to blame and comes to work with Bond to eliminate Koskov and thwart his plans. He's realistic and his conversations with Bond are some of the highlights of the film for me. Art Malik as Kamran Shah is another important and memorable supporting character. It is odd to see the Afghanistan characters portrayed in such a lighthearted, "freedom fighters" role, given the past 25 years or so. But in this film, Kamran is Bond's ally after Bond tosses him the keys at the jail. He helps Bond hugely, and Kara as well, enabling them to fight and escape at the airbase. He and his men turning up at the finale (Kara's concert) does provide some more obvious humor as his men are wearing packs of bullets on their bodies and they apparently had some "trouble at the airport." That was one of the more obvious bits of humor and at least came at the end of the film. Kamran is played well by Malik; a likeable and useful ally.
Q was wonderful and not too small a role this time, and Desmond seemed to have very nice rapport with Dalton. A new Moneypenny who looked lovely but alas for me was portrayed in a very cliched manner (glasses askew, chewing on pencil, sighing ...). I immediately missed Lois even though she was too old now for the role. Bliss looked fine; I just wish they'd had written her Moneypenny better. Saunders was well played; stuffy and so fond of following the rules, "I'm sure you understand, old boy" (or however he said that). He ended up seeming exasperated yet impressed with Bond, realizing he had to let him do his thing, his way, to get results. Sad to see him so brutally murdered; I would have liked more of his character. Who else? John Terry as Leiter was played laid back, hipster, 80's style, light and I didn't care for him much. Walter Gotell's Gogol made a final appearance, brief but fine (that is one actor who never aged for me on screen; he always looked exactly the same!). Julie's Rosika I mentioned above was another wonderful supporting character for Bond. So yes, this gets a high score overall.
OVERALL - Whew! What a ride. I saw The Living Daylights in the theatre, with a 12 year old friend I had taken with me (one of the kids I coached on my soccer team). It was her first Bond film, and both of us enjoyed it tremendously. I haven't kept in touch with her, which is a shame as she was special to me; but I can bet that Dalton is still one of her favorite Bonds. He makes that kind of lasting impression for many fans.
Yes, I was ready for your close-up, Mr. Dalton. I was eager and a little anxious to see this film as I did love Roger and Sean but felt that Roger should have stepped down with Octopussy. So coming off the really low note for me that was A View To A Kill, I wanted a fresher approach, a more realistic yet still fun and exciting Bond, driven and more like the Bond I had read in the novels. And that is what The Living Daylights delivered. I thought, and still think, it was a very good Bond film with enough action, a good story that built, great characters, and one of the most romantic endings.
Timothy Dalton was Bond. The Living Daylights shone like the sun on the horizon of a beautiful new dawn. D'Abo was the perfect Bond girl for this particular story, with this Bond. I was truly thinking we were in for a much longer ride with Dalton. Sigh ... Then after the brutal - and for me mostly unsatisfying and unsettling and uncreative film that was License to Kill (no qualms about Dalton as Bond, though) - I was really wanting another film that was more balanced. But no, that door became shut and stayed closed. I was just one of many who were saying, "But come on! One more film with Dalton, please!" Alas, it was not to be. So as the top of my review says (from the PTS) "Better make that two ..." for me, I amend it to, "Better make that three, or four at least" - Bond films that is, with Timothy Dalton. An unfulfilled dream. But at least I have The Living Daylights to watch again and again. Thank you for that, Timothy. You will always be one of my favorite Bonds.
Before I give my thoughts on where characters should be placed in reviews, it's looks like Nic is possibly thinking his fellow originals are going to be lobbing virtual tomatoes and assorted vegetables at him in response to his thoughts on LTK. And well, that might happen and it might not, so Nic, let it rip.
I consider Elektra, Cigar Girl and Miranda all to be villains. Elektra and Miranda both qualify as Bond women because he had fun with them, but Giulietta Da Vinci and as mentioned Onatopp are strictly in the villain category. And as far as Eve, I've been thinking about that and I am still thinking about that. Right now I'm trying to get us up through QOS and then see where we're at, as I don't know that everyone will be ready to review it until they have the DVD in hand. A long movie, and a lot to remember.
:(
Fair enough if you didn't like it, it's not a film for everyone, but why uncreative?. The story was different for a Bond film and lots of the action/stunts were really cool and original (like the plane water skiing, bits of the tanker chase, and the plane fishing. The new Batman flick basically copied the plane fishing, but with a bigger budget.)
Well, @NicNac, as for your review of LTK ... let me say: go for it and d**n the torpedoes/tomatoes. I wrote as honest a review as I could and sadly (it went against my taste) had to rate some things highly because I was trying to be strict in my rating - but I do not enjoy or like this film much (even though I thought Carey and Timothy are great). So if tomatoes are to be thrown, I will help catch them, too. ;)
BOND
James Bond in this film struggles to keep himself together. The same character who calmly dispatched of the man who killed his wife (DAF), who avenged colleagues as early as FRWL without any emotional baggage, here becomes a one man vigilante machine, immune to criticism, unaware of who is on his side and who isn't. The Bond in CR and QOS was raw, prone to error. Bond in LTK is just out of control.
The only time in the film where Bond is given the chance to slow the pace and show some of the class and style we are accustomed to, Dalton fails to deliver. He enters the casino looking as stiff as a board wearing an ill fitting tuxedo and an ill advised hair cut.
When re-watching a simple scene from FRWL where Bond dines with Grant, and studying Connery's body language it makes one realise why Connery is a film star. You can't help but watch his every move. There are no equivalent scenes in the drab, bitter LTK to gain the same feeling. The meeting with Sanchez is the obvious one, but it lacks the tension and impact of the series' great face offs.
2/5
WOMEN-
Pam the brash, mouthy pilot smothers her own sex appeal with that annoying habit women had back then to prove their worth in a mans world. "Why can't you be my secretary?" she asks Bond. 'Oh be quiet woman' thinks I.
Lupe, probably the most stupid, brainless Bond girl in the history of Bond movies. One wonders why Sanchez didn't toss her to the sharks.
Della, Leiter's lovely and innocent bride who never deserved the fate that befell her. Had I been her father (who disapproved of the marriage), I would've been visiting Leiter in hospital and cutting some more bits off him.
2/5
VILLAINS-
Sanchez a drug lord powerful enough to control the President of a country, and all his minions. The sleazy Milton Krest, financial master mind Truman Lodge, turn coat CIA agent Killifer, Professor Joe Butcher and best of all slimy Dario, Sanchez's killer (and who knows what else if we really want to read between the lines).
Quite a varied and well thought out collection of villains, all three dimensional and lead by a very competent Robert Davi 5/5
HUMOR-
Well, if the humour is as subtle as some suggest maybe I'm simply not subtle enough myself to recognise it. At best the humour is as black as night with exploding heads and gratuitous violence. There are some one liners if you dig deep enough, but they aren't very good and rendered worse by Dalton's delivery. 1/5
ACTION-
The pre title scene isn't as good as TLD, but apart from that there is a lovely bar room brawl, some excellent stunt work in and around the Wavekrest, and a tanker chase which is still amongst the best two or three climatic action scenes in the entire series. Dalton, who sometimes struggles with the humour and the more subtle aspects of Bonds personality handles the action with aplomb. 4.5/5
SADISM-
Well if we mark a film for the amount of sadism then this is a 5 star wonder. But the sadism here is too brutal and too pronounced for a Bond film. I don't need to list the more extreme examples, but I do know that some of this stuff doesn't belong in a Bond film.
However, fairs fair, the sadism is gratuitous to the extreme so 5/5
MUSIC-
Pedestrian, with a title song that sounds like its from a Bond pastiche 2.5/5
LOCATIONS-
Key West, Florida and some fictional country that isn't Mexico. 2/5
GADGETS-
Exploding toothpaste, some stuff in Q's bag, Q's walkie talkie disguised as a broom, and best of all a signature gun. A good enough idea that it was resurrected for Skyfall. 3/5
SUPPORTING CAST-
M and Moneypenny are underused, thankfully. Q is given more to do, thankfully. Leiter is excellent, Sharkey is killed off too soon. After the death of Della and the maiming of Leiter we didn't need another sacrificial lamb quite so soon.
The main support is from the large array of villains, so we don't have much room for the rest of the cast.
3/5
OVERALL SCORE AND RECOLLECTIONS- 30/50
As unsure as I was on first seeing this film, as TLD had been such a joy, I took my brother in law the second time and he was as underwhelmed as I was. At a time when action films were as good as Die Hard, LTK without the good humour, and the other worldy exoticism was a mundane big screen equivalent of an pop album filler track. Where Bond had once been the clever, multi functional and smug know it all who could bed any woman he wanted, now he was a snarling, eye rolling killer with non of the class, non of the dress sense, non of the visual or verbal wit we were used to. Every man wanted to be Bond is the old adage. Not in LTK.
Blandly directed, routinely photographed, with some poor editing (i had seen the film three times before i realised Bond didnt kick M in the stomach, and when Bond is looking for Leiter's killers he sees his friend's buttonhole on the floor of a warehouse...I think!)the film is saved by a better cast than it deserves and some fine action scenes.
But, and this is a big but, LTK is part of a huge collection of diverse Bond films. As different from MR as MR is from FRWL and we need this diversity in order for the series to develop. And, I'm glad the film exists, because that is where Bond was in 1989. And had Dalton made his third then I would have been as delighted as anyone, because the more Bond the better.
In other words, I don't like LTK but I like the fact that it exists.
I'll say. I kept starting, but couldn't get past BOND, and ended up editing most of it out because I was just repeating stuff I had said many times before.
I do actually like Pam, she is seriously quite sexy but her character kept changing. I hated Lupe though >:)
And @SirHenry, may I suggest Eve is not a Bondgirl? We don't see her go off have 'good time' with Bond. I know many people assume they 'consumed' their relation, but imo that's because they assume he sleeps with every girl. And, in the end, she is Moneypenny. We all know they flirt, but that's it. I remember Mendes has also said there's a cut scene in which they indeed discuss the not sleeping together.
Personally, I like that better and stick to that story in my brain.
Just my two cents for consideration, even though I'm not an old fa... I mean, original ;-)
I think since Moneypenny will also be a recurring role and always a supporting character, maybe we should keep her only in that category. I am happy if they finally consummate their relationship at any point; it doesn't bother me or take away from my enjoyment of that character - but many other fans wouldn't like that, I think.
By the way, if you haven't yet, go back and read all the reviews for LTK; everyone else (all the originals that is) on this thread has a far different take on it from Nic and me.
Of course I read all the reviews! I've been following this thread from the start. I always thought 'older' fans would be more.. homogeneous in their opinions. Quite a few reviews have amazed me.
Well, one of Monneypenny's qualities in the books is that though she likes all the double o's and really finds them attractive, she stays perfectly professional. It gives a bit more depth to a character which hasn't got much screentime, ordinarily. I find Eve's decision not to go back to fieldwork very professional as well, so it would fit her portrayal as well.
Glad to get an "n" as opposed to a "rt" :))
Suggestion noted and I'm inclined to agree with your thoughts on (Eve) Moneypenny as an supporting character rather than as a Bond girl. I don't think you can point at the fact that Ian Fleming suggested Bond and Moneypenny once had a sexual relationship, or look at the on screen flirtation of Craig and Harris and make the conclusion that she is a Bond girl. If anyone had the screen time of a leading lady in SF it was M and for the same reasons I also don't think you could make her a Bond girl either. I'm thinking the women who actually qualify are two and that's Marlohe and Sotiropoulou, with M, Moneypenny, Q, and Tanner in their usual supporting roles.
Obviously myself and the other fellas have a much different take on LTK and what we got out of the film. I thought it was a brilliantly written departure from the usual character and formula. It was like a second breath of fresh air after TLD served as the first coming out of the Moore era, and absolutely, undoubtedly influential on the direction Craig and his films have gone in. But like OHMSS before it, and QOS that followed, LTK is a film that polarizes opinions and for as many people who love it, there are many who don't. In this case both Nic and 4Ever are in the minority, whereas a different polling of 6 other people may see a different reaction, so it's not a case of right or wrong and unlike negative reviews of classics such as Goldfinger, there is at least a certain amount of logic and line of thought here that I can understand.
All the prior reviews are now complete so new ratings will appear Friday evening, and the Brosnan era will start right on schedule the following day. Would still like some input on holding off on Skyfall until the DVD is available.
Disagreed with most of the review but I like this statement. That's how I feel about my least favourites as well.
I love a serious Bond film, just not LTK. But it was an attempt to update Bond, try something new. Nothing wrong with that.