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
The first four films, so close to the time the books were written, and basically the
Wonderful Fleming novels Put on film. Then OHMSS for the same reason. After
A long wait until LTK, great to see Fleming's Bond back, and lastly CR, once again
Reviving the spirit of Fleming again. =D>
I am reminded of the mad scientist character in the Beatles' film Help! This movie is full of Bondish elements and even mashes the Bond theme into the soundtrack repeatedly. At one point said scientist muses aloud of the film's Maguffin, a ring which is stuck on Ringo's finger: "with a ring like that I could --dare I say it? -- rule the world!"
I'm sorry, @Birdleson, I missed that. Apologies!
sorry bro, but I cannot get behind YOLT
It has a wild OTT plot and premise
The volcano set is impressive but that is not enough to qualify it
Donald Pleasance is actually comical looking and a let down as Ernst Stavro Blofeld
It leaves itself wide open to parody and face it: YOLT came dangerously close to imitating many of the imitators of the day.
Is it a fun romp? Yea, I guess...
I stand by my nominations: the first three, OHMSS, and CR as being classics. See my earlier post. :-*
Perhaps we need to take a good look at the nominations so far and how many votes each as received. Then anyone who's inclined can give their reasoning for or against the nominees...then, finally, a vote. Who's up for that?
Goldeneye came out more than 20 years ago. Not to argue the relative merits of every Brosnan film here & now (I wouldn't agree that each of them, or even most of them, is VERY bad) -- but how new does a film need to be, to be too new by your standards?
What I argued was if it s bad and new. Some pretty mediocre entries, such as the aforementioned YOLT gets a "classic" status from many, just because it s from that initial Connery run.
Doctor No: 7
From Russia With Love: 7
Goldfinger: 7
Thunderball: 6
You Only Live Twice: 1 (no, that can't be right. @Birdleson, you only vote twice:) 2
On Her Majesty's Secret Service: 6
Live And Let Die: 1
The Spy Who Loved Me: 4
For Your Eyes Only: 3
The Living Daylights: 3
License to Kill: 2
Goldeneye: 4
Casino Royale: 7
Quantum of Solace: 1
Skyfall: 4
Nominations are still open and if anybody wants to double-check my tabulations I'm fine with that. Just a few observations:
Obviously, Connery-era Bond has a big advantage in the competition for Classic status.
Dalton is held in fairly high regard: both of his entries are nominated (yes, as is 100% of Lazenby's tenure.) Brosnan, not so much: only 25% of his films are nominated, while 75% of Craig's films get the nod.
YOLT, LALD, and QoS get 1 nomination apiece. Anyone care to defend or attack the nominations?
CR is the only "modern" Bond film to receive near-unanimous acclaim. Perhaps due to the fact that this film had so much Fleming material to work with?
Even though the villain is menacing, it isn't really a Bond film. It's a revenge story, and an unlikely one, with importance shoehorned in.
First off Leiter should, as a CIA operative, not (yet) be involved in the recapture of what in essence was just a drug baron. That's the FBI's turf. And Bond tagging along makes it even less professional. Then Bond hands in his resignation because 'nobody is doing anything'. That's sliding further down the scale of professionalism.
Sure his infiltration is done well, but all in all there's a highly trained operative of MI6 going rogue on a personal revenge mission because his friend from the CIA who shouldn't have been involved in the first place lost his wife and hand. That says something about his judgement and emotional stability.
Even worse, the villain, however impressively played by Davi, is not much more then a local druglord who's got a small time dicator in his pocket. He's no thread to the UK, he has no plan to 'take over the world' (to quote a question from another thread).
All in all, Bond acts unprofessional and the villain(s role) isn't up to par for a true classic.
Bond also goes rogue in QOS and OHMSS.
QoS is the film that really doesn't deserve classic status in my opinion. The shaky-cam action really harms the movie as far as I'm concerned. Over and over again I found myself thinking, "Wait! What just happened here? Did they -- ?" And while I personally found the plot original and interesting -- once I'd seen the movie several times and had pieced the whole thing together -- the plot to steal all the water in South America is just too "Real World" to be a proper Bondian scheme. There are actual existing companies striving to do just that legally, and they'll probably succeed eventually, forcing another peoples' uprising and putting some real-world Felix Leiter into the position of having to defend the capitalist oppressors. Rather than being an exciting diversion from real-world cares for a couple of hours, QoS was actually sort of depressing for me to watch. Give me a plot to turn all of the USA's gold radioactive for a couple of decades and I'm totally down with it. Give me a plot to turn most of the world's security systems into one gigantic Big Brother operation (lookin' at YOU, Spectre) and I can't be bothered.
True, forgot that bit. Makes little sense to me he ended up with the DEA, but anyways, that was a minor point. And Bond, and that's the main point, goes rogue on a personal vendetta. In both QoS and OHMSS (here he's just 'on leave' so it isn't even rogue as @Beatles mentioned) he keeps on going on the case itself. That makes a huge difference.
@Beatles perhaps there's too much focus on the 'realistic' scheme in QoS, I can agree on that. But 'Quantum' (in hintsight SPECTRE) is larger then that. I agree on the shakey cam and perhaps too artistic an approach, but the film has a lot of style, wit, and even espionage. For me it has similar qualities as Dr. No, allthough the main villain is completely different. Actually, thinking about it, perhaps that's the best argument to get QoS of the list. The villain isn't impressive enough, not larger then life.
Even GF has two electrifying scenes in resourcefulness: knocking the lamp into the bath (quick witted) and manoeuvring Oddjob into throwing his bowler hat into the metal bars and using a severed electrical cable to fry him. Even Moore got in on the act: the cigar/aerosol flamethrower in LALD, plus having to jump across the backs of alligators after his magnetic watch fails him is another great moment. These scenes are all iconic in their own way and elevate Bond from the ordinary. I think Jason Bourne has borrowed heavily from the old 007 Rule Book of Resourcefulness, especially with his fighting techniques: a biro pen; a book; a rolled up newspaper, etc. It works for Bourne and it used to work for Bond, before the writers got lazy and fell back on the over reliance of gadgets to get Bond out of a tight squeeze.
So, with the exception of GF which is a classic due to the world first in gadgets, I think what makes a classic Bond movie is 007 using his super intelligence and not some Q Branch gadget that has already been telegraphed with its introduction in an earlier scene, so when it comes to Bond being in a tricky spot it comes as no surprise when he suddenly utilises it.
Personal Ingenuity is a key ingredient in the Bond souffle.
I am keeping that list, but adding back in the one I never meant to leave out (From Russia With Love) So here are mine, @BeatlesSansEarmuffs - just make sure you have mine counted in correctly (I think you do).
Dr. No
From Russia With Love
Goldfinger
Thunderball
The Spy Who Loved Me
For Your Eyes Only
The Living Daylights
Goldeneye
Casino Royale
Skyfall
Note: Thunderball is not a favorite of mine, really, but it sure ranks as a classic for me with all the elements coming together and Sean's performance, as well as Luciana's.
As our unofficial tabulator of votes for "classic" Bond film status, I am arbitrarily going to proclaim that a minimum of 3 votes is needed to award Classic status. Therefore, with several days having elapsed since our last entry, I believe we have decided that the following Bond films can be determined as Classics:
Dr No -- 7 votes
From Russia With Love -- 7 votes
Goldfinger -- 7 votes
Thunderball -- 6 votes
On Her Majesty's Secret Service -- 6 votes
The Spy Who Loved Me -- 4 votes
For Your Eyes Only -- 3 votes
The Living Daylights -- 3 votes
Goldeneye -- 4 votes
Casino Royale -- 7 votes
Skyfall -- 4 votes
Any carping? Any grousing? Any other animals you'd care to throw out there in a John Glen fashion? Speak now or forever...(leveling the sniper's rifle at a sensitive area)...hold your peace!
However , time has not been kind and nobody can say in 2016 that YOLT stands to hang with the likes of DN, FRWL. GF. It has no pure and noble intention of telling a good story... And whats furthremore, I don't think you can call antyghing from the last 20 years a classic, just because it hasnt been long enough to even know.
Also why is For Your Eyes Only on this list ?