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
CR is acceptable because it's Bond's Beginnings. He's earning it. What was QoS's and Skyfall's excuse? Monty Norman charging too much to use it? Then need to stop being subtle with it and finally use it when Bond is doing something awesome. I'm sick of it being stuck for the credits.
:-??
Ok that's fair. You want to hear it more. That's fine. However CR was not less of a Bond film without these elements imo, which means it can be done without the accoutrements - in terms of the NSNA example which we are discussing. They just had a ridiculously bad score for this movie.
SF as well - the highest grossing 'Bond' movie at that!
My main beef with NSNA is that the last half hour is poorly paced and boringly anti-climatic. Give me the speeded up stuff in TB over it any day of the week.
With better casting, better lines for Connery and a kick 'a' score, I think the movie would have been so much better though. These are 'essential' Bond elements that were missing imo. That's where they really messed up, especially against OP.
If we haven't learned to squint at the iffy bits by now, how are we supposed to enjoy Moonraker and Tomorrow Never Dies ?? Squint a bit, chaps! Close your eyes and think of England!!
(I never rewatch CR67. That movie is a turd even Orson Wells couldn't save.)
Connery as an older Bond is in top form. Barbara Carrera as Fatima Blush outdoes nearly all of the femme fatales in the EON series (with the exception of Xenia Onatopp). Edward Fox as M and Alec McCowen as Q are a breath of fresh air after the M and Q scenes in the regular series have grown decidedly stale. Klaus Maria Brandauer is an excellent villain.
I even like most of Michel Legrand's score. The title song works well over the opening sequence; there's a catchy theme for Fatima Blush (fittingly feline in feel); the scene-setting cues (Bahama Island and Une Chanson d'Amour) are effective, as is the big band music accompanying the demise of Jack Petachi. What is missing is Legrand's equivalent of the James Bond theme from the EON series, which should have played under the curiously un-scored motor-bike chase through the streets of Nice to make it more exciting.
It's like saying Michael Jackson's 'Invincible' is better than 'Thriller'. NSNA hardly outperforms 'Condorman'.
For you maybe. And I respect your opinion. My opinion is different. Also, don't forget this is a mild appreciation topic for NSNA.
TSWLM is a good Bond film by the elements. But IMO it lacks as a realistic spy thriller. Wunderful that they build the 007 stage to house this insanely big tanker set. But here it shows that TSWLM was merely about form, not contents
The aspect of "the ridiculous" was also one of the reasons Sean Connery start feeling increasingly uncomfortable about the direction of the films. And that started already already during the script brainstorm sessions on "Goldfinger", in which Connery's remarks/worries were more or less ignored.
In all honesty? I truly believe FYEO was Moore's best film with the cold war aspects of OP as a 2nd favourite and TMWTGG the Moore film with the most memorable villain. TSWLM really is my 5th favourite Moore film.
And NSNA? I just like it way more than, let's say, AVTAK, YOLT, GE and DAD.
NSNA is not a realistic spy thriller either. I genuinely cannot fathom how someone would deem it superior to one of the definitive Bond movies.
But off course @RC7! I fully agree. Hence why I do like other Bond films more than TSWLM. I think movies like FRWL, CR, OHMSS and SF have at least more of that spy realism than TSWLM.
In all honesty, this is also a matter of personal taste, which is also very subjective . And it would be nice if you can at least respect my taste without agreeing or understanding it. Ok? It is what it is. Deal with my "insane taste" or don't discuss it :-).
By the way....I haven't at least heard ONE thing that you DID like about NSNA. Many people in here can do that, because it's an appreciation topic. I at least explain why I'm not so fond of TSWLM. But you simply "hate" NSNA.
TSWLM is one of the great Bond films imo. because it has a perfect blend of all elements that make Bond great. There is a suitable spy element during Bond's time in Egypt. It's not drawn out, but it's certainly there. It also has all the other elements associated with Bond (stunts, babes, cars, explosions, great sets, great villains, great dialogue, music - in some areas, etc.).
Then there's the action. NSNA at times feels like a cheap TV film from the 70s. I have seen similar action scenes in those two Reb Brown Captain America TV films. Add to that a gruesomely outdated score, and NSNA has nothing of that two-minutes-into-the-future thing going for it that the EONs had and still have. Especially the "grand finale" is a total let-down, with underwater mayhem that loses me completely. At least in TB, I get a sense of what's going on.
BUT, despite its many flaws in terms of cinematography, NSNA has some interesting acting performances to offer, most notably from Connery himself. He's only half the Bond he was in FRWL, but I find him amusing nonetheless. Brandauer is a treat. And Basinger was my childhood movie crush so I certainly don't mind her. Valerie Leon and Barabara Carrera deliver the goods too.
Returning to my two-minutes-into-the-future comment, I will admit that the videogame scene, while old before the 80s were over, always has me focused. That, however, cannot compensate for Dr. Evil's sharks with whatever it is they have on them. And the fact that Bond's ultimate tie-breaking clue is an ugly jewel Largo gave his mistress to remember where he hid some nukes, annoys me.
Overall, NSNA is a tough film to process. I'm always giving it a fair chance, even though I blame Kevin McClory and his court fetish for A) the rapidly deteriorating health of Ian Fleming, B) some of the delays the EON Bonds have suffered in the past and C) the absence of Spectre / Blofeld in the post-Connery Bonds. Whenever I rewatch the entire series, I include NSNA. Whenever I listen to the scores, I select NSNA for my playlist as well. Is it a bad film? By now I must have seen it often enough to have developed some marginal appreciation for it but I will say this; I rank it lower than DAD and even CR67 because the latter, at the very least, has a GREAT score, nice sets and none of that "let's go fifty rounds against EON" tough-guy attitude.
My biggest complaint is still this: this film was years in the making, had a big enough budget and a producer ready to stir things up and start his own Bond franchise. Yet all those years of preparation, all that money and all those good intention produced "just" this film? EON produces films that are ten times as good, in one tenth of the time McClory spent on the whole thing. And so as a Bond fan, I'm glad that audiences, against all odds, gave Moore-o-pussy several millions of dollars more credit than Never Say Connery Again. McClory spent half his life trying to build a tower that would cast a large shadow over EON; but the only thing he ever finished was a tool shed that only remains standing through the goodwill of people like us. This is a summary of the man's career.
Do I dislike McClory? One might say I do. Even if we can blame Fleming for having shared a couple of drink too many with a couple of guys and taking material the other two had worked on without even giving them some credit, there was never any reason why McClory should have sought to destroy the legacy of Harry and Cubby. That's like going after Peter Jackson because Tolkien had looked funny at your grandmother once.
I still have a huge issue with the action which seems so small compared to EON films. The 2nd Unit teams for EON has always been an underrated backbone to the franchise as they are mostly responsible for the tremendous action on the screen. IMO, it is very evident through the health club fight and the horse scene near the end. The best of the action is the motorcycle chase which still seems small.
Now if they substituted story over action that is one thing, but the story is equally small for me here. They take the grandiose SPECTRE and water it down here and all of the great elements of TB's story all translate poorly. Any changes to the story they made were significant downgrades in my opinion. While Fatima is a definite plus, even her character seems sloppily executed.
My favorite Bond vlogger summarizes my opinion well at 11:14 in his OP vs NSNA review:
I agree that TSWLM is a better film, but he's entitled to his opinion. Quit being such an elitist.
He knows I love him really. Calm yourself.
Oh my mistake then. Didn't know you chaps were well acquainted!
I think Connery is definitely in better shape in NSNA but I vastly prefer his performance in DAF. He's having the time of his life in that film.