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
You're clearly baiting for an argument. Something that is frowned upon in a situation like this. Most people would just let it go. But as with our recently banned dimwit, you just can't do that can you.
@barryt007 please don't respond to this.
The same Top 10 is more probable. I might be tempted to examine the threads here.
@TheWizardOfIce doesn't need a warning.
Even when he is insulting, he does it with such panache, eloquence, wit and in a sharp-tongued-manner that it is a whoopee, he is highly entertaining and funny too.
If anything @TheWizardOfIce should become minister of sarcasm and satire on this forum.
You on the other hand @Comte_de_Bleuchamp remind me of another certain username that finally got banned for good (I hope). The resemblance is uncanny.
Doesn't surprise me in the least. DAD is a disgrace, and no other Bond film is remotely so dreadful.
Yes. Good work on his part. And I'm delighted to see that the forum's assessment of SP is identically in accord with mine.
So if you're witty enough, it's ok? Personally, I don't know what's witty about calling someone a c**t anyway.
The top 3- CR, FRWL & OHMSS are in a world of their own, same w DAD, albeit a netherworld.
The community is clearly under a mass hypnosis.
The re-boot films are all ranked way too high, and the Connery films don't seem to completely dominate top 6.
I helpfully provided some correction though w the Connery adventure thrillers all distributed top 6, and the re-boot melodramas, grouped bottom 4. :D
I saw SP 7x in theatre, and have watched it 3 more times on blu.
That was more than enough to get the film's Bond measure.
There is just enough off in the film, that I can't push it up through the ranking.
In the early stages, I thought maybe, but I later found myself dreading everything from the tedious torture scene and forward. The film for me then bogs down and becomes way too dark and kinda dreary.
I don't like the Mendes Bond touch anyway.
But like all Bond films SP has its great moments, so I'll watch it in rotation with the other films, but I can't push it up the rankings ladder.
I prefer the pre-reboot films, even DAD, although DAD also has a problem with its finish. It's not a bad Bond romp until post Ice Palace and then its way too much.
It becomes way too noisy and busy a finish, from the point after Bond finishes his destruction of the Ice Palace and his final battle with Zhao.
The movie gives me a big headache after that point, which is why its locked into #20, on the originals ranking.
I realized SF had to go the bottom of the list, because I suddenly realized that of all the Bonds, SF is the one I am least inclined to pop in for a spontaneous view.
Of the Craig films, I found myself more inclined towards QoS and SP, so I had to twig the order.
Olga and Craig's performance do draw me to QoS PLUS the length is short.
QoS only asks me to commit a limited exposure to the grievous Forster and Haggis touches that tarnish the film.
This allows me to savour the more Bondian moments, but with both SF and SP there's a whole lot of Mendes going on.
All the drama and thematic tedium leaves me numb.
Craig himself though has grown on me, after my initial CR misgivings, but the tone of the post Campbell films have not.
For me CR is the best of the Craig Bond films, but Craig's best work I think comes in SP and QoS, and much of SF, when he's not all burdened by being old dog.
Craig grew as Bond, but his films got bogged down, IMHO of course.
@benny That is inspired, putting DN at #1 Bravo!
Why thank you @timmer. After going through the Bond films in a semi random order, DN just stuck out to me. It's a film that I've always appreciated, but in the last few years have really noticed what a strong debut film for the series this was.
The little aspects that even today have gone in-noticed. Bond slipping the doorman a note as he leaves the casino. Bond offering his lighter to M during his briefing, only for M to refuse it and find matches. The three blind mice in the back ground as Bond and the commissioner arrive at Strangways house. It's little moments like these that make the film standout. Coupled to that the wonderful way the film is directed and shot. It still looks fantastic over fifty years on. It's also a very simple and less complicated plot. Albeit more dated than most, but a good story, with good characters and some fine acting. Connery was still keen (obviously) but he really is good in this. His mannerisms, the way he conducts himself. It's a wonderful film that I could easily watch again as soon as the end credits roll.
That's the funny thing though. It does seem that the Connery-classics with slower pace and less action, like DN, are more respected than some of Daniel Craig's films, who basically have this slower pace and less action as well (SF, CR).
@Gustav_Graves I feel that too. FRWL and DN have a slower pace but are somehow engaging as well. SF and SP to me drag on and while there's excellent individual scenes, there's nothing really to look forward to in a beginning to end viewing.
Slow pace is fine as long as it's engaging (eg SP board room and Mr White scene, Game of Thrones). Doesn't help that the Mendes soundtracks are atrocious.
TB is an unfortunate case because it has mostly everything right, but the pacing drags the film down...a lot. It would easily be a top 5, but is instead near the bottom
@timmer Thanks. I've done a list from the rankings on this thread. The one I posted is rankings since Spectre was released (101 rankings). I have a list from page one, the results are reasonably similar.
Maximum points (currently 24) to 1st place and 1 pt to last.
Not a mass hypnosis, you're just, to put it mildly, not overly fond of the Craig era. In fact I have your ranking highlighted as an interesting one. Films 1-10 as 1st to 10th, 11-20 as 11th to 20th.
Is that an inside joke I don't get?
Or just your favourite word you spread around on the threads?
A little of both...problem ?
Not at all, not at all. Just trying to understand.
Jolly good....
Good work @w2bond . I engaged the same formula back in I think 2010 or 2011, anyway well before SF had been released, and well after QoS had settled in.
The only difference is that I awarded points from 21 for first place, down to 0 for a last ranking.
I didn't want any last-place points awarded just for showing up. eg any points DAD earned were for managing to finish ahead of at least one other film on someones list.
I was using pencil and paper and a calculator. It was a massive chore. I used the most recent 100 members, complete rankings. So our methodology is identical. The points weightings are the same.
I assume you are using a spread sheet. The manual way that I used was exhausting. So bravo for taking on this chore, and in a data-entry efficient way that will allow it to be maintained
It's a vital reference tool for the fandom I think, so if you are able to maintain the study in a not too burdensome way, that is huge.
And the results of course are fluid.
When I undertook the study the results were thus
FRWL easy leader...well ahead of #2 OHMSS
OHMSS strong #2 well ahead of the rest
#3-7 was a 5 pak which was tightly bunched but well separated from #8
If I recall, CR was in this group. I really don't want to guess at the other 4, but if I had to I think the group included the TLD and GF for sure. Not sure about the other two.
But I dubbed this group the super 7 as there was separation from the rest of the pack.
What seems to have happened in the interim is that CR has aged extremely well.
With hindsight, It was clearly on an upward trajectory at the time, and has since managed to overhaul the two runaway leaders.
DAD was buried deep at the bottom, in its own deep hole, barely in sight of the other films. That has not changed.
Then there was another little bunch that were separated from the rest above
Most notably DAF TWINE and AVTAK. MR may have flirted with this group too
As for my own ranking, the Connery films resonate with me as the slam dunk best of the bunch. Honorable mention to Laz and OHMSS, a superb '60s Bond which owns the 7 spot.
The first two two Rog films, I appreciate very much, as there is Guy Hamilton carry over from both my clear-cut #1 DAF and of course the superb GF.
#10 has always been in flux. For now its TSWLM.
From 10-19 I can juggle the order.
DAD is locked into #20...although CR may give it a nudge some day and maybe even creep up further. CR has growth potential. I am coming around slower than others.
The re-boot films for now though occupy bottom 4.
I think Mendes efforts will stay at bottom with CR first and QoS 2nd, so the Craig films subset rankings do now seem to be chiseled in stone.
I personally think it's merely the 'evergreen status' that makes you like DN and FRWL a bit more. They are engaging, but so are SF and SP. I guess it also has to do with the fact that the Bond franchise can't do too much good anymore within the fan community.
We know how Trekkies basically destroyed the Trek-franchise commercially. By constantly criticising the franchise and not being able to sometimes set aside criticism a bit for some good fun, the Trek-franchise is in financial danger as we speak.
We need to understand very well that we forummembers are no EON-employees. And at times we should perhaps point the fingers towards ourselves and admit that we are perhaps not that much of an expert as the actual people who make Bond films tirelessly.
I personally love SF and SP, because they take the time with every scene, just like FRWL and DN. But the fact that SP and SF were produced in a rather self-destructive social media era with lots of populist traits, could result in a lot of negative backlash around here and around everywhere :-).
Let's say if DN was entirely copied as a brand-new remake for 2016.......the film would have been a massive disappointment to many of us around here. I am sure of it.
Something about it being almost entirely contained in just one location is nice, too, especially considering it's a beautiful locale.
Fleming even worked Ursula Andress into OHMSS, he was so impressed with her casting as Honey, or maybe he was just impressed with Andress period ;)
DN is not an obvious choice for one's top pick, but it's certainly an inspired and worthy choice as it really did serve as a superb introduction.
I've got it ranked #5 . That's because I like even more, what it inspired in terms of the bigger budget Connery spectaculars that followed.