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
I remember i watched TLD at the Odeon Leicester Square and i liked Dalton as Bond but having grown up with Sir Roger it was a total change and took a lot of getting used to,plus i used to think it was very luvvy duvvy in parts,all kissing and cuddling etc.
I was 17 and after AVTAK it was a big difference.
Yes. I always thought that DAD was rather an outcast in the Brosnan films, when I first saw it. There was something strange about it. The first half was relatively dark and erm, Flemingesque, and the second half was bloated and sci-fi, whilst the other Brosnan era films were much more consistent.
YOLT - OHMSS
OHMSS - DAF
MR - FYEO
AVTAK - TLD
and DAD - CR.
OHMSS-DAF
DAD-CR
These shifts are much more significant
Licence to Kill was a very dark, very heavy film that felt very mature, almost to a fault.
Though goldeneye does have some dark plot lines, I always found it to be rather juvenile (I.e. Xenia, tank chase, Boris). To me GE felt like some 13 year old boys tried to make a serious film. I thought the scene on the beach with Natalya criticizing bond was totally shoehorned in. I also felt that the film screwed up Alec Trevelyan by introducing the Cossack revenge angle. I thought it would have been perfectly fine for for him as a former double-O realizing he can use the satellite to get rich. The Cossack angle diluted his character. I enjoy the heck out of GE but what keeps it out of my top tier is that other films in the series feel more polished and professionally made-it has a juvenile feel after the adult feel of LTK
I enjoy LTK but I think it does suffer at times from being too grim.
The Cossack angle was a good one, I think, but Sean Bean was far too young to have such background.
I think you are spot on Brother! We usually get nothing but praise for GE and while I consider it to be best Brosnan film, but it does have its faults and you touched up on them quite nicely. Like it or not, we do see the beginnings of problems that would track the Brosnan films like a tomahawk cruise missile: Eon is playing it way too safe.
It depends did you see LTK in 1989 on release then waited till 1995 for G.E? If you didn't you won't understand.
I know GE is looked at as Pierce's grittiest and darkest film but to me although I think it's his best I don't like it and it was like having Fleming's Bond for 2 films then going back to the RM era again, I admit there was a tonal shift in from GE - TND but the difference between 1989-95 was significant for me.
I haven't been playing catch up on Bond since 1977.
You could also include TB-YOLT. From the wonderful fantasy of Fleming to the less wonderful fantasy of Roald Dahl. I wonder if they would have gone that route had Fleming still been around.
I doubt they would have cared with Fleming thought. He was not thrilled with Sean Connery, thinking he was just a good looking stuntman. Cubby and Salzman were gonna do whatever they were pleased.
TB-YOLT was not much of a jump. We see the continuation of the proliferation of handy gadgets while Bond is reduced to a bland dummy whose purpose is to act as a catalyst and manipulate the gadgets.
A footnote:
notice how in GF when the gadgets first began to be "cute" none of them ever really helped Bond much. The car after leading Oddjob and his cohorts on a merry chase gets run off the road and crashes leading to Bond's capture and near death.
The homing device he tried to use to alert the CIA of Goldfinger's plan and this went to shit as well.
Well said. As far a GE goes, at least there were dark moments as mentioned above. Perhaps there were Timothy Dalton-minded script items left in tact such as the moment where Alec reveals himself and when Bond is with Natalia at the beach in a poorly-acted scene with the nicest backdrop. SF really shocked me when it denied the events of QoS and referenced GE. For some of us fans, LTK never had a true sequel or one that carried over much besides Q.
Yes i saw both several times at the cinema and,unfortunately,didnt feel what you felt,which is why i questioned the validity of it.
Oh,and @BAIN123 on a personal note i actually came out of the cinema after LTK with a lot more optimism re Timothy Dalton and thought his performance was more relaxed and the film way way superior to TLD.
Looks like i was the kiss of death for him,as that film was his last !!
Did it really deny what happened in Quantum Of Solace? I don't think so, it just moved the timeline on somewhat.
What reference to GoldenEye are you referring to? I bet you, you could find in each film, references to another it you wanted to as there are so many.
I also wondered what this was in reference to, @dramaticscenesofQOS ?
He means the reference to the exploding pen. I remember I was quite surprised when I first heard that...but in a good way.