Reporting For Duty
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Categories
Mr KILL OR Mr Wint and Mr kidd
Which of these two was the worst Bond villains well Mr kill He does not say much but its his name that did me mr kill? we are really trying their? besides he is clearly a poor attempt at a odd job rip off. And for the size of him he didn't put up much of a fight real crap villain. But not as bad as Mr Wint and Mr Kidd by far the most annoying of all Bond villains right to the end when Mr Wint gets some kind of cheap frill when Bond kills him by putting his arm between his legs and chucking him over the rails of the cruise liner (finally the worst thing of them two they was in the whole film I'm shore Bond could of found a way to kill them off early on in the film). I mean there was something clearly something wrong with them two a bit of inter breading I think them two did not have a brain cell between them but managed to kill off so many people even get the better of Bond a couple of times. But how? as they spent most of the film skipping and holding hands they was hardly Red Grant but still managed to give Bond a hard time i did not get it. And was so glad to see them two bumped off. For me the two most annoying villains (and I know someones going to say their maybe a similar discussion somewhere maybe but this is more specific to these characters but any views other characters are welcome.
^ 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
Did not mind wint and kidd they fit the tone of diamonds and were a law to there own on occasion, they just seemed to enjoy killing people.
Wint and kidd did seem to have there own agenda :-)
They probably kept some of the conflict diamonds for themselves ;-)
edit OF COURSE THIS IS ONLY IF THEY WORKED FOR HIM.
who did they work for....
It was always clear to me that Wint & Kidd were hired assassins working for Blofeld and would act as a "trail eraser" for a price. If they had been interested in stealing the diamonds for themselves they would have never made it up into space for laser refraction. At the film's climax it is easy to see that Wint & Kidd are professionals and want to fulfill their side of the bargain and eliminate Tiffany and more so Bond for their meddling in the operation. After all, they are hired assassins and it wouldn't look too good on their CV or for their next recruitment drive.
PS. We know for sure that W&K work for Blofeld because when Bond kills one of the Blofelds in Whyte Tower he is then knocked out by gas in the elevator and is picked up by Wint and Kidd immediately afterwards and taken out to Las Vegas Valley where he is placed in a pipeline and left to die.
Mr. Kil, now that's a name to die for. He was a bullshit character and totally wasted. Why even have him in the movie? Incompetent as hell and he couldn't even kill Jinx...I know a lot of us on this thread would have volunteered for that assignment.
What a lot of younger fans don't seem to appreciate is that once OHMSS left the screens the producers decided to bury it and move on almost as if it had never happened. At the time the producers were in disarray and didn't even have a Bond replacement until Arnold Picker stepped in and lured Connery back. Once Connery was aboard they made the decision to rub the slate clean as if Lazenby's Bond had never existed and alter direction for a lighter 70s Bond. Of course they didn't completely jettison the harder-edged Bond, but instead made some of the characters around him a bit more frivolous. Connery still delivers an air of assured menace and conviction in his performance despite looking a little rough around the edges. The fight in the elevator is a great scene, so is the cool and casual manner Bond takes a ride up the outside of Whyte House and scales the wall using just a piton gun. I absolutely love those scenes. The way Bond responds to Plenty O'Toole being thrown out of the window and elbowing the hood in the stomach is not dissimilar to Sévérine's fate except Bond response is the right one here. In fact there's so many great scenes and lines in this movie that raise it above a crap Bond film I could be here all night going over them. I just think it's fashionable to pour scorn on this movie because it's not the direct sequel modern fans want to see after OHMSS and have decided to lump it in with MR, AVTAK, TMWTGG and DAD because they like to make lists.
On the plus side though it does have an appearance by Ed Bishop, who voiced a character in one of my favourite childhood TV shows :)
If I had to pick between Wint and Kidd and Kil though the former win out easily. At least they actually do stuff and aren't there just for decoration.
When bond gets gased it what Blofeld calls 'merely a elevator' in Willard whites penthouse suit, i vaguely remember Wint and Kidd being in the parking lot and taking bond to the pipeline? Its feasible that they either think they are working for white or know they are working for Blofeld.
sorry @bondsun just noticed you touched on that point.
Your comment about the box office defines if a film is crappy is asinine. But since you brought up crappy, lets address that. Your comments has more holes in it than the plot of DAF.
I submit to you that there are lots of films making a ton of money that would qualify as "crappy". But lets keep it to Bond movies. DAD made over 400 million dollars worldwide. You gonna tell me and the rest of us on this board that DAD is a good movie? Lets throw MR in that argument for good measure.
I stand by my comments about DAF. It is not only crappy movie it is a ton of horse manure and reeks of roadkill.
I'm with you all the way here mate.
DAF is certainly enjoyable and has the makings of a decent Bond film right up until Peter Franks dies. After that its a shambles - shoddy plotting, worse characterisation and a pathetic climax.
Actually take out the para surfing and invisible car and DAD might actually be better? Hmmm - no it's still got Jinx, the robocop suit and Mr Kil.
Through all the dross of DAF Wint and Kidd shine like a beacon and the best moments are when they are on screen. Don't really think the same could be said for Kil.
In fact I'm not sure he's really worthy of inclusion in a henchman debate at all seeing as he only has two scenes - one to introduce his pathetic name ('Alimentary Dr Leiter' that's a funny line - P&W you won't be missed) and one to kill him off.
I'd rank him more alongside Sandor or even the pitiful Elvis rather than award fully fledged henchman status. He's not even as good as the likes of Hans or Kriegler who were pretty uninspired.
With regards to box office, I'm simply taking the same argument that has been used over and over again for Skyfall as a means of defense and applied it to DAF. I made that quite clear in my previous posts. Does that make me wrong or does that show up the same fundamental weakness in the SF debate when used there? If you have a problem with that I suggest you take it up with those on other threads that like to use BO as a yardstick. But somehow I don't think you will because you'd rather bash a movie that has the momentum of hostility behind it which makes it easy game.
I agree that it's not a perfect film, but it's certainly not the pile of fecal matter that you make it out to be. There's still a lot of enjoyment to be had from watching it and on the plus side it has a cracking score by John Barry.
Have a good day.
I personally don't like DAF very much (although there are some fine moments) but I know others that rate it very highly. I think this is a matter of opinion and an argument that cannot be won...
Especially in a thread that isn't about how good DAF is or comparing its BO with other films.
I don't think this thread has much in terms of legs, but in deference to the original poster, I'm going to say let's get back on topic and talk about the merits of Wint and Kidd vs. Mr. Kil.
If there's not much to be added, then I'll get the keys out.
Depends what one is looking for, as much as anything else. If one is looking for pure escapism that doesn't require a lot of thought, Diamonds Are Forever probably is a good fit.
Mr Kil was an obscure character, so vague, only on screen for limited time, an overall disappointment. "I'm Mr Kil"... etc
Instantly forgettable
Wint and Kidd however, are two of the greatest characters ever in James Bond, fun, humorous, lively, bizarre, unpredictable. They almost make Diamonds worth watching, (along with Jill St John)
The ending on the ocean liner is Bond gold, they had so many great moments whenever they were on screen, such as the killing of Tynan in the Nevada desert, killing Mrs Whistler in an Amsterdam canal, to trying to bury Bond alive in a construction set outside Vegas. They were immense
I give Kil 0, no let's make it generous, 1 per cent of the voting, and Glover and Smith get 99 per cent of the vote
They can't be beaten. Goodnight
1% for Kil?? I demand an investigation into this outrageous Mugabe style vote rigging as the exit polls had it at 0.0001%. Something is amiss there.
Regarding Wint and Kidd, I agree they were great and memorable henchmen. First time I saw them drop the scorpion down that guy's back, I was like "Woah, that's ruthless!" Then they walked off holding hands, and I was like "Okay- that's... different!" I like the fact that they're also a hench-duo. When else do we see that? Perhaps Xenia and Ourimov were a duo. Wint and Kidd are unique henchmen indeed, and they get plenty of hench-dialogue- two things missing in the Craig era.