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
While DAF is camp I don't think its as childish as Moonraker. The humour in the former is more smutty aswell ("I'm afraid you caught me with more than my hands up").
That said there's more that stands out for me in MR (the centrefuge sequence, Corine's death, the "Flight into Space" soundtrack) so part of me prefers it.
See I don't want to be laughing through a whole Bond film. Comedic elements here and there are fun in a Bond film, but when the entire thin is a joke I feel let down. It's odd, I don't like MR but I do like TSWLM for the campier elements...
Sure the humour was smutty. But it was actually funny to an adult whilst a child could watch it and not notice. I also think the pantomine villains in DAF are funny too. Wint and Kidd really push it, but are actually interesting.
You are right. Moonraker was more childish in parts whilst earlier Bonds were for adults.
Oh and when he says ("I'm afraid you caught me with more than my hands up"). That is so sophisticated, classy and totally filthy at the same time.
This is why I hated the DAD humour which was too obvious. It lacked true wit and the delivery was poor. Old Bond was damn funny without you getting offended by crassness.
I admit the last time I watched MR I was cringing in some parts.
DAF (for me) just feels a bit boring and sluggish, When they leave Las Vegas and go into the desert the film just sort of...drags a bit in my view. There's little in the way of actual tension.
I also think its a bit too "relaxed" for its own good if that makes sense.
I agree, it is a bit relaxed and such and I think that's because Sean was in it. They fit the film to Sean, and I feel that if that had stuck with George and the seriousness that they got out of OHMSS, then DAF could have been great.
DAF as a film slows down after Vegas. But is has this outstanding charm. And the one liners were so good.
But I will not pretend that it is a serious take on Bond and for those fans who loved the style of FRWL were sorely disappointed.Me, I like Dalton serious but like the opposite too but more with Connery doing it.
And I was totally devoid of any illegal substances also. I don't know what made me think that, apart from the fact, he did actually look quite fresh and ready in that, if you've ever seen it
Can't look beyond also, that DAF hits a dead end once we reach Nevada
Up to then, it's not that bad a watch, I can't quite believe myself saying
It sure is a fine watch. And the music by John Barry is sumptuous. Like the desert scene in the early scene when the helicopter arrives to meet the doctor but Wint and Kidd have killed him.
I think Connery is better in DAF than Moore in LALD . He has the humour but the toughness. I love LALD, but is more for the campness of the villains and humour. Moore is really good but Kananga has the best line "Names is for tombstones baby!".
I would love to see a young Dalton in LALD. I always picture him because he has the horror look and would fit image wise with the Voodoo theme. He is a Bond that has a classic horror image down perfectly. Byronic as they say.
What do you guys think. Plus, I would like to have seen what Timothy Dalton's third film would have looked like (going by the info in MI6-HQ)
I think it is a shame that Connery did not do OHMSS. Purely from the standpoint that he is clearly a far superior actor to Lazenby. And the material in OHMSS would have given him plenty to work with.
OHMSS was supposed to be filmed after Goldfinger which solidifies your argument. It was only because of McClory that they went for Thunderball instead.
If Dalton had done a third, I would be way happier with the franchise as a whole.
Dr. No and FRWL : NO SWAP.
Goldfinger : Pierce Brosnan of 1990's, (if I had to swap as second choice. But It's Sean best so I wouldn't.)
Thunderball : Timothy Dalton, as second choice.
YOLT : George Lazenby true swap
OHMSS : NO SWAP
DAF : as explained above, better Moore but logically Lazenby. true swap, even if I liked Connery in.
LALD : Lazenby would be my second choice. Second because Moore did well.
TMWTGG : No SWAP.
TSWLM : Pierce Brosnan, second.
Moonraker : NO SWAP
FYEO : a thread already exist and there's my thought ; Dalton is the best choice but Moore did at best.
Octopussy : NO SWAP.
AVTAK : old thread as well. But there Dalton should have starred in. true swap
TLD : Pierce Brosnan as a second choice.
LTK : NO SWAP
GoldenEye : Sean Connery ; Timothy Dalton 2nd choices maybe.
TND : NO SWAP.
TWINE : Timothy Dalton, second.
DAD : ?? Finally Brosnan did well overall. Probably Roger Moore.
CR : Sean Connery in a very first film ; Timothy Dalton or Pierce Brosnan in a begin 90's film. true swap
QoS : Tim Dalton, second choice.
Skyfall : Pierce Brosnan. If he was younger.
I hope it's understandable enough in your minds, fellow agents.