›

Bond movie ranking (Simple list, no details)

1…2223252728…242

Comments

  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Chang wrote:
    Not a fan at all of the Brosnan era. I was hoping to find a list here with the same 20 thru 23.

    The closest I found was:

    4 GE

    21 TND
    22 DAD
    23 TWINE

    You are not alone. I too rank the four Brosnan films at the bottom of the barrel. Not just because I care not for Brosnan as Bond, although that is indeed a factor. The whole era is just so unlovable. The things I enjoy are so few I can fit them in one post, and not a long one either.
  • GetafixGetafix
    edited January 2014 Posts: 11,425
    I was tempted to put all the Brozzas at the bottom, but thought I'd give Pierce a break for once. I actually quite enjoyed TND when it came out and have always regarded it as his 'best' - so have been generous and put it in at 18. Would have been a lot better if they'd cast Monica Belluci...


    1. Goldfinger
    2. From Russia With Love
    3. Doctor No
    4. The Spy Who Loved Me
    5. The Living Daylights
    6. On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    7. You Only Live Twice
    8. Octopussy
    9. For Your Eyes Only
    10. Licence To Kill
    11. Quantum Of Solace
    12. Casino Royale
    13. A View To A Kill
    14. Thunderball
    15. Moonraker
    16. Live And Let Die
    17. Diamonds Are Forever
    18. Tomorrow Never Dies
    19. Skyfall
    20. The Man With The Golden Gun
    21. GoldenEye
    22. The World Is Not Enough
    23. Die Another Day
  • Perilagu_KhanPerilagu_Khan
    Posts: 2,483
    11. QOS
    12. CR
    19. SF

    Hmmm...
  • GetafixGetafix
    edited January 2014 Posts: 11,425
    This is as much about how much I enjoyed watching them as anything, and I rank the DC films in that order. As much as I respect CR, I actually found QoS more enjoyable. To be entirely honest, doing the rankings made me realise there are only a few films - probably my top 8 or 9 - that I like in their entirety. The middle rankers are good in parts, with the bottom ranked films having almost nothing to redeem them in my eyes. With the exception of TND, which I thought was 'alright', I don't really regard the Brosnan films as Bond movies - more of a weird aberation. The series took a long hiatus after LTK and did not begin to get back on track until CR IMHO.
  • Perilagu_KhanPerilagu_Khan
    Posts: 2,483
    And it apparently went back "off track" with SF.
  • GetafixGetafix
    edited January 2014 Posts: 11,425
    Let's leave that discussion for another time.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited January 2014 Posts: 11,189
    A View to A Kill and Diamonds are Forever above Skyfall. Well I never.. :p

    I'm not saying Skyfall is flawless (or that AVTAK and DAF don't have their merits) but...common @Getafix. Surely Craig and Bardem are worth more quality-wise than the ageing Connery/Moore duo, endless stunt doubles, Grace Jones and Charles Gray in drag.

    (A lot of your other choices I can sort of see the logic though - even if I don't agree)
  • MayDayDiVicenzoMayDayDiVicenzo Here and there
    Posts: 5,080
    BAIN123 wrote:
    A View to A Kill and Diamonds are Forever above Skyfall. Well I never.. :p

    I'm not saying Skyfall is flawless (or that AVTAK and DAF don't have their merits) but...common @Getafix. Surely Craig and Bardem are worth more quality-wise than the ageing Connery/Moore duo, endless stunt doubles, Grace Jones and Charles Gray in drag.

    (A lot of your other choices I can sort of see the logic though - even if I don't agree)

    I found AVTAK a lot more entertaining than Skyfall, which I find to be a little overrated IMHO. I cannot express anymore on this thread how much I regard AVTAK without any eye rolling.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited January 2014 Posts: 11,189
    MayDayDiVicenzo wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    A View to A Kill and Diamonds are Forever above Skyfall. Well I never.. :p

    I'm not saying Skyfall is flawless (or that AVTAK and DAF don't have their merits) but...common @Getafix. Surely Craig and Bardem are worth more quality-wise than the ageing Connery/Moore duo, endless stunt doubles, Grace Jones and Charles Gray in drag.

    (A lot of your other choices I can sort of see the logic though - even if I don't agree)

    I found AVTAK a lot more entertaining than Skyfall, which I find to be a little overrated IMHO. I cannot express anymore on this thread how much I regard AVTAK without any eye rolling.

    Hmm...fair enough. Each to their own. I just would have thought in terms of directing and performances alone SF is automatically in a higher tier to AVTAK (at least Daniel Craig doesn't act like a lechy old man at times either).
  • GetafixGetafix
    edited January 2014 Posts: 11,425
    MayDayDiVicenzo wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    A View to A Kill and Diamonds are Forever above Skyfall. Well I never.. :p

    I'm not saying Skyfall is flawless (or that AVTAK and DAF don't have their merits) but...common @Getafix. Surely Craig and Bardem are worth more quality-wise than the ageing Connery/Moore duo, endless stunt doubles, Grace Jones and Charles Gray in drag.

    (A lot of your other choices I can sort of see the logic though - even if I don't agree)

    I found AVTAK a lot more entertaining than Skyfall, which I find to be a little overrated IMHO. I cannot express anymore on this thread how much I regard AVTAK without any eye rolling.

    Yes, for me this is about entertainment value and ranking films in the order that I enjoy them. I'd rather watch AVTAK than Bond23, so I ranked it more highly. Silva's entry is fantastic but for me at least, every scene after that is an anticlimax. Give me Max Zorin machine gunning his own goons while laughing maniacally in AVTAK any day!
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited January 2014 Posts: 11,189
    Getafix wrote:
    MayDayDiVicenzo wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    A View to A Kill and Diamonds are Forever above Skyfall. Well I never.. :p

    I'm not saying Skyfall is flawless (or that AVTAK and DAF don't have their merits) but...common @Getafix. Surely Craig and Bardem are worth more quality-wise than the ageing Connery/Moore duo, endless stunt doubles, Grace Jones and Charles Gray in drag.

    (A lot of your other choices I can sort of see the logic though - even if I don't agree)

    I found AVTAK a lot more entertaining than Skyfall, which I find to be a little overrated IMHO. I cannot express anymore on this thread how much I regard AVTAK without any eye rolling.

    Yes, for me this is about entertainment value and ranking films in the order that I enjoy them. I'd rather watch AVTAK than Bond23, so I ranked it more highly. Silva's entry in SF is fantastic but for me at least, every scene after that is an anticlimax. Give me Max Zorin machine gunning his own goons while laughing maniacally in AVTAK any day!

    Ha. Even Moore thought that was too much apparently. I agree its a good scene but don't know whether its better than most of Silva's stuff in SF (particularly his entrance and the chapel showdown with M).
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    Yes, I know Moore was a bit unhappy about that, as he says he was about kicking the car over the cliff in FYEO. But he also says he wishes he hadn't been photographed posing with a gun, which sort of suggests he regrets his whole tenure as Bond and wishes all the violence had been removed. I think he's being a bit silly. The Zorin scene is great entertainment.
  • MayDayDiVicenzoMayDayDiVicenzo Here and there
    Posts: 5,080
    Getafix wrote:
    MayDayDiVicenzo wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    A View to A Kill and Diamonds are Forever above Skyfall. Well I never.. :p

    I'm not saying Skyfall is flawless (or that AVTAK and DAF don't have their merits) but...common @Getafix. Surely Craig and Bardem are worth more quality-wise than the ageing Connery/Moore duo, endless stunt doubles, Grace Jones and Charles Gray in drag.

    (A lot of your other choices I can sort of see the logic though - even if I don't agree)

    I found AVTAK a lot more entertaining than Skyfall, which I find to be a little overrated IMHO. I cannot express anymore on this thread how much I regard AVTAK without any eye rolling.

    Yes, for me this is about entertainment value and ranking films in the order that I enjoy them. I'd rather watch AVTAK than Bond23, so I ranked it more highly. Silva's entry is fantastic but for me at least, every scene after that is an anticlimax. Give me Max Zorin machine gunning his own goons while laughing maniacally in AVTAK any day!

    I thought Moore looked great for 58 in AVTAK, much better than Octopussy. His performance was as good as ever. And I thought that Walken as Zorin nailed it, an eerie demeanour and a psychotic personna. I thought his performance was better than Bardem, and I don't like the scene with the hydron cyanide deformity...
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited January 2014 Posts: 11,189
    Getafix wrote:
    Yes, I know Moore was a bit unhappy about that, as he says he was about kicking the car over the cliff in FYEO. But he also says he wishes he hadn't been photographed posing with a gun, which sort of suggests he regrets his whole tenure as Bond and wishes all the violence had been removed. I think he's being a bit silly. The Zorin scene is great entertainment.

    I don't think he regrets being Bond at all (it got him a lot more money), just the overt violence associated with it. A bit odd I know but then again he has admitted to being a pacifist.
    MayDayDiVicenzo wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    MayDayDiVicenzo wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    A View to A Kill and Diamonds are Forever above Skyfall. Well I never.. :p

    I'm not saying Skyfall is flawless (or that AVTAK and DAF don't have their merits) but...common @Getafix. Surely Craig and Bardem are worth more quality-wise than the ageing Connery/Moore duo, endless stunt doubles, Grace Jones and Charles Gray in drag.

    (A lot of your other choices I can sort of see the logic though - even if I don't agree)

    I found AVTAK a lot more entertaining than Skyfall, which I find to be a little overrated IMHO. I cannot express anymore on this thread how much I regard AVTAK without any eye rolling.

    Yes, for me this is about entertainment value and ranking films in the order that I enjoy them. I'd rather watch AVTAK than Bond23, so I ranked it more highly. Silva's entry is fantastic but for me at least, every scene after that is an anticlimax. Give me Max Zorin machine gunning his own goons while laughing maniacally in AVTAK any day!

    I thought Moore looked great for 58 in AVTAK, much better than Octopussy. His performance was as good as ever. And I thought that Walken as Zorin nailed it, an eerie demeanour and a psychotic personna. I thought his performance was better than Bardem, and I don't like the scene with the hydron cyanide deformity...

    I think he looked better in OP and gave a better performance too. When he smiles at times in AVTAK his skin stretches out and looks weird
  • MayDayDiVicenzoMayDayDiVicenzo Here and there
    Posts: 5,080
    I would like to know what he thinks of LTK...
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    MayDayDiVicenzo wrote:
    I would like to know what he thinks of LTK...

    Me too. I wouldn't be surprised if he never saw it.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Seeing that your list has spawned so many comments, @Getafix, let me add that you have an excellent top three. They are the holy trinity of the old classics, and anyone who disagrees that DAD belongs at the bottom is propably not suited to own a pc.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    For me the first three remain the gold standard. I feel they just improved up to GF and then we had the first misfire with TB. Since then it's always been a bit hit and miss, with progressively more misses. Periodically they pull it off in style, as with TSWLM and TLD, or even CR to certain extent. But then the quality drops off again. You just have to live in hope that the next one will be a belter.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,801
    Getafix wrote:
    then we had the first misfire with TB.
    Hmmm... well I think TB went a bit too 'big' for its own good... but I wouldn't call it a misfire. I'd still place in a category with the first three, but yes, you can see it where it would be going after that...
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    chrisisall wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    then we had the first misfire with TB.
    Hmmm... well I think TB went a bit too 'big' for its own good... but I wouldn't call it a misfire. I'd still place in a category with the first three, but yes, you can see it where it would be going after that...

    For me TB represents a massive drop off after the first 3. After that they got into this thing of having to 'top' the last one. And then doing a 'serious' back to basics one, etc... It was inevitable. I just think the first 3 hold their own on pretty much every level.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,801
    Getafix wrote:
    I just think the first 3 hold their own on pretty much every level.
    I think even in GF the beginnings of the 'Big Cinematic Bond' were forming. But the movie was still small enough in scope that it wasn't fully there yet. I mean, watch Oddjob crush a golf ball in his hand. This is possibly the first instance of something impossible happening in a Bond film. :))
  • Perilagu_KhanPerilagu_Khan
    edited January 2014 Posts: 2,483
    The notion that DN, FRWL and GF are the quintessential Bonds is one that I think is shared by the critics. Heck, the Criterion Collection of Bond films is limited to those three. But among serious Bond fans this is a much more controversial opinion. Indeed, I daresay that among this cohort TB is quite possibly rated a bit higher than GF. I know I consider TB much the superior film.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited January 2014 Posts: 11,189
    I don't think TB is all that bad at all. OK its not as good as the first three but I think it still makes a pretty entertaining film. I enjoyed it when I last saw it a few months back.

    Besides, as much as I love Goldfinger was pretty daft at times with those cartoon comic relief gangsters. You couldn't imagine them in DN or FRWL.
  • GetafixGetafix
    edited January 2014 Posts: 11,425
    BAIN123 wrote:
    I don't think TB is all that bad at all. OK its not as good as the first three but I think it still makes a pretty entertaining film. I enjoyed it when I last saw it a few months back.

    Besides, as much as I love Goldfinger was pretty daft at times with those cartoon comic relief gangsters. You couldn't imagine them in DN or FRWL.

    So Dr No is a less daft character than Goldfinger...?
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited January 2014 Posts: 11,189
    Getafix wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    I don't think TB is all that bad at all. OK its not as good as the first three but I think it still makes a pretty entertaining film. I enjoyed it when I last saw it a few months back.

    Besides, as much as I love Goldfinger was pretty daft at times with those cartoon comic relief gangsters. You couldn't imagine them in DN or FRWL.

    So Dr No is a less daft character than Goldfinger...?

    In the film adaptations yes. He has a more sinister presence about him...and No as a film is, overall, played relatively straight with little comic relief.
  • GetafixGetafix
    edited January 2014 Posts: 11,425
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    I don't think TB is all that bad at all. OK its not as good as the first three but I think it still makes a pretty entertaining film. I enjoyed it when I last saw it a few months back.

    Besides, as much as I love Goldfinger was pretty daft at times with those cartoon comic relief gangsters. You couldn't imagine them in DN or FRWL.

    So Dr No is a less daft character than Goldfinger...?

    In the film adaptations yes. He has a more sinister presence about him...and No as a film is, overall, played relatively straight with little comic relief.

    I guess it depends on how seriously you take the basic premise of an evil Chinese criminal genius mastermind with metal hands living in a huge secret underground nuclear powered lair hidden on a small island off the coast Jamaica - which in the context of the film is a British colony - whose chosen method of assasination is... spiders (oooh, scary). Seen from a wider context the comedy is inherent in the whole set up (exactly what Mike Myers so affectionately lampoons) - not that this detracts from my enjoyment of Dr No.

    FRWL is I suppose by comparison a bit more plausible, but I've never bought the idea that the OTT formula only came in with GF. Considering the budget constraints, EON and Ken Adam managed to cram in quite a bit of YOLT OTT-ness into DN.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited January 2014 Posts: 11,189
    I suppose the difference is that, while Dr No is pretty ridiculous, it's told with a straight face - much like most of the books were. With Goldfinger things seem a little more...jovial perhaps, but not to the extent it would become.

    IMO Joseph Wiseman/Dr No has a degree of menace about him that I don't think Frobe/Goldfinger has as much of (that's left to Oddjob), and makes a fairly absurd character seem plausible and threatening - albeit vaguely.

    Goldfinger is in my top 5 but it's definitely bigger in scale than the last two. That's perhaps where the idea of the OTT-ness comes from.
  • GetafixGetafix
    edited January 2014 Posts: 11,425
    Respect for putting GF so highly - I like your trad non-trendy approach. What's your current rankings? Please don't say you have GE in your top five!
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited January 2014 Posts: 11,189
    GE has fallen a bit but its still pretty high. Enjoyed it on my last viewing. It's about number 6 for me at the moment.
  • GetafixGetafix
    edited January 2014 Posts: 11,425
    Should be grateful for small mercies, I suppose! ;)
Sign In or Register to comment.