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
As a kid Roger Moore's swansong, A View To A Kill, was actually one of my favourite Bond movies. It's really hard to put my finger on why that was because, in retrospect, it's very bizarre. Maybe it was a combination of the curiosity for unusual things that most kids have and the sheer intensity of Christopher Walken's performance as Max Zorin that made me want to re-watch this adventure over and over. What-ever it was, today I put it fairly low on my list. Apart from a Paris locale it strays entirely from the original short story From A View To A Kill, instead using an original script that's slowed down by a top-heavy first half that focus' on horse-race fixing before getting to the meat of the plot. It's definitely my least favourite Moore outing.
A View To A Kill is certainly "unique: within the Bond franchise. The plot may not be entirely original, boiling down to a variation on Goldfinger (complete with it's own meeting scene and dissenter who is swiftly dispatched - this time however, the scene makes a slight bit more sense) but there can be no denying that it definitely doesn't feel like Goldfinger. It feels odd and quirky and I'd put it down to several key factors. The first and most glaring one is Roger Moore's age. Clocking in at 57, he remains the oldest man to ever play Bond. His age is more than noticeable in this one. Unlike some people, it didn't distract me too much in Octopussy and I guess that might be because Maud Adams felt like aa more mature, age-appropriate Bond girl for Moore and the two shared genuine chemistry. In A View To A Kill we have Stacey Sutton played by Tanya Roberts and the age difference is way too noticeable. Did anyone else get the paternal vibe from Bond in the scene where he guards Stacey overnight? That might have been a nice angle to take this particular relationship and perhaps Fiona Fullerton's Pola Ivanova could have taken the reins as the lead Bond girl instead. Despite still being considerably younger she just felt way more appropriate for Moore in my opinion. Another bizarre element is the second Bond girl, May Day as played by Grace fucking Jones. Just that there adds a whole new level of weird to this movie. But her actual performance makes it even STRANGER: the look in her eyes as she tried to tame Pegasus at the races; wrestling with Zorin and then, when pinned to the floor, growling before making out with him; actually, make that growling all the time; "And I thought that creep loved me!". Don't get me wrong, she makes a suitable and very memorable henchwoman but the second she climbs into bed shudder even Bond looks uncomfortable in that scene - she overpowers him in bed for God's sake!
However, one of the most unusual parts of the film turns out to be one of, if not THE best thing in the movie. As I mentioned before, Chris Walken as Max Zorin is outstanding. He's the perfect choice for a Bond villain and he owns every scene he's in. He brings his own personal brand of crazy to the party and injects the story with energy and a rawness. He's so engaging it's hard not to wonder if most of his performance wasn't just simply "intuitive improvisation". Two of his best scenes have Walken at his crazy best. One being the scene where Zorin just brutally mows down his own men in the mine shaft while the other is the climactic showdown on the Golden Gate Bridge. This scene also features a brilliant score by John Barry, who creates another all-round great soundtrack for what would be penultimate Bond film.
Ultimately, A View To A Kill is definitely the strangest Bond film in the series but it's worth the watch just for Walken alone. I give it a 6/10.
The Beach Boys? REALLY?
Such a long post why even bother. I didn't eve read it all like other members.
I'm sorry if I offended you.
Thanks. Next Im going to watch The Living Daylights one of my favorites .
There is no need for these kinds of comments. If you don't want to read a post, move on to the next one.
I am a Dalton fan. I think his Bond is one of the best, he is criminally under-appreciated as James Bond and a refreshing change from campy, silly Roger Moore.
The Living Daylights is not Dalton's best (I prefer Licence to Kill), but this film still winds up in my Top 10. It has few flaws, namely a lack of great villains and an overly complicated plot. Miriam d'Abo's Kara was not my favorite Bond girl ever. She often acted as a damsel in distress. That being said, she had a head on her shoulders and didn't take nonsense from anybody. She held her own, which couldn't have been said about a good number of previous Bond girls.
Also, it's very odd, looking back in a post 9/11 world, to see the mujahideen as allies.
There are a lot of great things about this film; Dalton, of course, is awesome, Necros is one of my favorite henchmen, the soundtrack is among the best, the action is awesome, the Cold War feeling makes this film unique, and the opening teaser is one of the most exciting, and most badass. Dalton actually did that stunt work himself!
Overall, it's a great film, and a great first film for Timothy Dalton.
I would give this one a 8.5/10
I feel the same way. Not trying to insult anyone, just express my opinion about the picture.
This is all good, fun stuff.
Then blam! It all just falls apart.
Licence to Kill is in a lot of ways a good metaphor for Timothy Dalton as Bond; it's often underrated. Both the film and the lead actor were initially criticised it for being "too serious" or "too dark" and as a result disregarded it entirely with out giving it a proper chance. I've never really understood phenomenon. I mean, how could there still be a majority complaining about this? Just two films ago weren't a majority of the fan complaining about things getting too tongue-in-cheek? With the Dalton era the series finally started to take itself really seriously again and suddenly people are pining for the Moore era. It's baffling. Of course, now days, with the popularisation of Daniel Craig's grittier and more realistic Bond in Casino Royale, Timothy Dalton and Licence to Kill are starting to get a bit more credit among fans and are even being recognized as being ahead of the time. But that hasn't stopped some critics who still ranks it among the worst in the series because they see it as "just an 80s action movie" that has none of the essence of a true Bond film. Personally, I don't think this gives the movie enough credit.
Licence to Kill's tone is where most people take an issue with it. Admittedly, it's a pretty big contrast from the last decade or so of Bond films and it's even a bit of a leap from Dalton's previous outing, The Living Daylights, which is definitely a more serious take on the franchise but no where near the level of intensity as Licence to Kill. However, I think this tonal shift is completely warranted given the events early on in the story. These events are the catalyst for the plot and fuel Bond's driving motivation while setting the mood for what is to come. It's not like the shift came out of no where, it was set up from the very beginning of the movie; so to quell any gripes with the tone, it's not being gritty for the sake of being gritty. In my opinion it would have been far more jarring to have Bond act as though it was a normal assignment throughout the movie despite what had happened. If they had done that it would start to feel reminiscent of the way Diamond are Forever was handled... and I've already gone into detail on why that was a huge mistake. Keeping with the theme The Living Daylights sought to establish, Licence to Kill successfully emphasises that Bond is only human and that when he's emotionally compromised he will react out of impulse. The result is possibly the most faithful depiction the complex character presented in the novels in the entire franchise since On Her Majesties Secret Service. It also works on a deeper thematic level. Tho explain this there will be MAJOR spoilers ahead: After Felix and Della's wedding, Della throws Bond her garter which he solemnly refuses. To explain Bond's reaction Felix tells Della that Bond was once married. We as the audience know that this was to Tracy and that it ended in tragedy when she was brutally murder after their wedding as a consequence of his job. The scene to follow is a direct parallel to those events in which Della is murdered and Felix is maimed by sharks as a result of Felix and Bond capturing Sanchez in the pre-titles sequence. Bond reacts to this in the way he was never allowed to react to his own wife's death in Diamonds are Forever. He is consumed with anger and stops at nothing to get his revenge. He's both physically avenging his friends and symbolically avenging Tracy. John Glen finally gives us and Bond closure for Tracy's death.
The violence in the movie also comes under fire. People argue that it make the film feel less like a Bond movie and more like a generic 80s action film. Frankly that's a load of crap. It's a revenge story, so naturally there is going to be a harder-edge to the violence to signify Bond's aggression but the fact is, violence is a fundamental part of the franchise. The protagonist is a secret agent with a licence to kill... it's inherent in the premise. Moreover, early films were groundbreaking for their time in-part due to the level of violence in them. The novels before them were also highly violent and often deemed unsuitable for children because of it. So it's not a new thing and it certainly doesn't make Licence to Kill any less of a Bond film for having it - whether you personally like the result or not.
Licence to Kill's cast is another reason why the film works. Timothy Dalton is superb as Bond - showing us a vulnerable and human side of the character while also embracing his ferocity and obsession with revenge; Robert Davi's Franz Sanchez is a terrific villain to match Bond and Carey Lowell is stunning as the Bond girl Pam Bouvier. The supporting cast is also great with David Hedison becoming the first Felix to reprise the role (doesn't hurt that he happens to be my personal favourite too), Q getting an expanded role in this time around and a young Benicio del Toro as Sanchez's psychotic henchman Dario.
Of course, there are flaws as well. Although the tone is entirely appropriate for the film, there are some bizarre shifts in it at certain points - perhaps in an attempt to cater to audience expectation. Things like the ninjas, and the winking fish fall flat and feel out of place; it may have been better if they had wholeheartedly stuck to the grittiness throughout. Also, given the events of the film, Felix seems awfully happy at the end of the movie... though I like to attribute that to the morphine.
I can understand it not being to someones exact taste - not everyone wants the same thing in a Bond movie - but Licence to Kill is pretty universally overlooked with some even proclaiming that it's an all round bad movie when it's really not. It's a genuinely thrilling outing for Bond and well worth the watch. It's a real shame Dalton couldn't stick around for at least one more. I give Licence to Kill an 8/10
For the first time, we get to see 007 to go a personal journey. These are my personal views, and how I interpret the films.
Daniel Craig's Performance in Casino Royale
Craig delivers a multi faceted portrayal in CR. His is an arrogant Bond, but full of the tenacity and earnest, that we've come to expect from Bond.
His is a darkly charismatic Bond, full of subtle humour. (Think of Bond's interactions with the hotel receptionist at the Hotel Splendie, when she wishes him a “happy stay”. Craig's reaction is just priceless - “Thank you – I will”. He seems genuinely touched.
On reflection, Bond knows shooting up the embassy was a mistake, and so he breaks into M's flat, accesses her computer, to set it right. If it wasn't for Cater, I expect Bond would have interrogated Mollaka.
Still, I have a problem with said scene. Fleming's 007 would not have been so disrespectful. I guess Craig's Bond was seeing how far he could push M, to get a gauge on her. Leaving her laptop open, gave her a lead. As with Le Chiffre later on, when Bond discards his cover, to see what effect it would have on Le Chiffre, so Bond does a similar experiment on M.
After M dress Bond down in her apartment, Bond travels to the Bahamas, with M's advice in mind, logging on with M's account, so that she could see what Bond was up to, following the leads he got from M's computer, and tracing them to the Bahamas, which leads to Le Chiffre. A repentant Bond, setting out fix his mistakes.
If there is a caveat to Craig, in CR at least, is that he is not comfortable in his new found sex status – see Bond seduction of Solange.
One can also look to Bond's choice of clothes – casual in the beginning of the movie, and gets progressively smarter and the film goes on. By the end of the picture he's in his “armour” - a 3-piece suit.
Although Bond does enjoy the finer things in life, he doesn't always have an appreciation of them – see “does it look like I give a damn”.
After his episode with the “dirty Martini”, when Bond and Vesper are dining, Bond realizes that he's lucky to be alive. Hence his enjoyment of his eating. Bond could be dead tomorrow, so he has to enjoy the finer things in life.
Despite Craig's Bond evolvement throughout the film, he still has a flash of instinctual violence, when Le Chiffre wipes him out. Bond grabs a knife, and to hell with the consequences. If he can't beat Le Chiffre at the table, he'll just have to execute him.
Le Chiffre beats the lesson “the bigger picture” into Bond, in the harrowing torture scene. That's when it all clicks for Bond.
Le Chiffre almost breaks Bond in the torture scene. Bond is reduced to a snarling animal at this point. And the only way that Bond's sees, to take his secret, is too provoke Le Chiffre, hence his wisecracks.
Virtually everyone assumes Bond is emotionally cold, even M, after they discover Solange. The only person to see through Bond's bluff is Vesper.
Which makes Vesper's betrayal of Bond, even more heartbreaking. See the way that Vesper, in the hotel lobby in Venice, holds on to Bond's face, just a moment too long.
Vesper was terrified, but hid it well. In SF, Bond sees through Severine's bluff.
Vesper left a clue for Bond in Venice – being Bond, she knew that he would get Quantum.
As Ian Fleming said, “hard men have a tendency to slip into sentimentality”, and we get to see that trend with Vesper in the shower scene.
Bond's soul is being destroyed by the work he is doing, as demonstrated by the bruising stairwell fight – one of the series very best. After that fight, Bond is left gaunt faced, and shaken, as he surveys his face in the mirror – Fleming's creation laid bare.
Ian Fleming's Casino Royale was not an origin story, but the filmic adaptation, is so brilliantly is one. From arrogant agent to the fully formed one in the final reel, tempered by Bond's oft brutal lessons.
Seeing CR for the first time, and like Sean Connery's first four films, I couldn't take my eyes of the character of Bond. And I still have that reaction to CR, to this day.
Timothy Dalton said that he would've liked have appeared in CR, as they're was so much “meat on the bone”. I wonder what the other five actors would do, if they had CR's story arc?
It's a bit unfair judging Craig by the same standard as the other Bonds – they just didn't have such juicy material to sink their teeth into.
Here we have the fully formed agent. From CR and QoS, I imagine, DN – DAD, playing as it was, then SF. I found the performance of Craig in CR and QoS, to have similarity to Connery's performance in DN – both have a slight uncouthness to them, but by FRWL. This “rough diamond” that Connery and Craig share, has been completely smoothed over, laying the foundations for the cinematic version of 007.
Pre Fleming – CR/QoS
Fleming's 007 – DN/FRWL
Cinematic 007 – GF (with some notable exceptions – TB, OHMSS, TLD, LTK)
Daniel Craig's Performance in Quantum of Solace
Mr White is looking out over Lake Como, when he gets a call.
White - “Hello.”
Bond - “Mr. White? We need to talk.”
White - “Who is this?”
A shot rings out, hitting Mr White in the knee.
“The name's Bond.
James Bond.”
Cue music.
Bond, then, has completed his journey. Then what was QoS story about? I thought Craig's Bond has regressed.
It took my a few views to understand that QoS, despite it's frenetic editing and hectic action, is a character study on Bond.
True that Craig is not bombastic as his début outing – he doesn't have to be – the performance in QoS subtle evolution of the character presented to us at the end of CR.
There's one directorial decision that I think is wrong for 007 – during the car chase, Marc Forster takes us inside 007's mind, depicting 007 as slightly frazzled. I always imagined that Bond's mind, especially if there is action involved, to be an oasis of calm – Bond is a man of action, after all.
During the interrogation of White, Bond slips a picture of Vesper inside his pocket – hard man tipped over into sentimentality.
M does see through Bond's bluff - “she's not important”. But she fails to realize that Bond is motivated by his duty, and not vengeance. And if his duty is getting closer to the person the manipulated Vesper, then so be it.
Not helping matters is the fact that Bond kills his leads, Mitchell and Slate. But Bond was fighting for his life. He makes a joke of it to M, but it fuels the mistrust that she has of Bond.
In CR, Bond surveys his face after the stairwell fight, and he's troubled. In QoS, however, after his fight with Slate, Bond hardly glances at his reflection. He's getting more comfortable as 007. After the events in CR, Bond vows to bring down the people that makes spy's spy.
When he's in the hotel reception, in Haiti, Bond has an idea, and as quick as a flash, turns the charm on. From taciturn mask, to charming, at the drop of a hat.
The only times we see through this “taciturn mask”, is when Bond is with his close male friends, Mathis and Leiter, or with his female companions.
When Bond throws Haines' bodyguard of the roof, M mentions that he'd been shot. Although Bond was distracted by M's revelations about Haines, he should have said that he didn't shot him. Perhaps Bond doesn't like excuses. But M has no choice but to limit Bond's movements.
This is after a great piece of intelligence by Bond, at the Tosca sequence, where by he photographs the members of Quantum – resourceful and quick thinking. This is also allied to another bit of quick thinking – Bond's uses his DC-3's engine to blind the pursing aircraft, then shepherd the plane into a mountain.
Bond is a master deflector – every time M or Mathis mentions Vesper, he distracts them with an another question.
Until, when Bond and Camille are resting in the sink-hole, when Camille opens up to Bond about her suffering. Then Bond feels comfortable with sharing his story. Maybe it's his way off saying “sorry” for denying Camille the chance to kill Medrano.
Camille is an example of what Bond could become. Driven to vengeance, after Camille kills Medrano, her demons are not laid to rest. “What next?” she asks Bond. The only way the Bond can connect with a beautiful woman, is sex – hence the awkward scene between her and Bond in the Jeep. I felt sorry for Bond, in that particular moment; a rarity for me. (Apart from the physical ordeals that Bond goes through of course!)
After seeing Camille, and how empty she is, the void that could not be filled by vengeance, Bond gives up any idea of vengeance that he may have had, in that Jeep scene.
Before that Bond and Camille are trapped in the burning hotel room, Camille is paralyzed by fear. In a call back to Fleming's LALD, when Bond and Solitaire are being keel hauled, Bond is planning to kill both of them, until a fortuitous explosion reveals a gas canister.
In another throwback to Fleming, we see Bond drunk on a plane, taking him and Mathis to Bolivia. In Fleming's novels, Bond used to repress all his unpleasant memoires, and bury them in a box, only to be excavated when Bond is quite drunk.
After Fleming's Tracy was murdered, we see Bond broken at the start of YOLT. During his “rehab”, Bond sleeps with prostitutes, to see if that will help him get over Tracy. In QoS, Bond sleeps with Fields – callous at it may be, Bond is trying to get better; he has to see if his “what-not” is working.
Despite Bond racking up a quite impressive list of dead conquests, he never seems to learn.
In a nice piece of evolution, Bond discards Field's teacher cover, and instead books them into the finest hotel, just because he can. The growing appreciation of the finer things in life.
In a breakthrough moment, M finally trusts Bond, after they discovers Field's body, and after Bond escapes MI6 custody. Bond is doing his duty, and M knows it. I think M always knew it, but was pressurised by the British and American governments. (With oil running out, who can blame them?). M tells Tanner; “he's my agent, and I trust him. I don't give a shit about the CIA and their trumped up evidence”. Bond views the world as black and white, not sullied by the trappings of grey.
When Mathis is cleared by MI6 of any wrong doing, Bond almost turns to Mathis by default. Still, their camaraderie is intact, and Bond asks Mathis to go to Bolivia with him, with tragic consequences. No wonder Bond is insistent that he works better alone after this.
Bond controversially dumps Mathis body in a dumper, after they'd had a heart to heart. Personally, I thought Bond didn't want his friend to share the ground with his killers. One could tell that it hurt Bond deeply, despite his claim “he (Mathis) wouldn't care”, after Camille is shocked by Bond's apparent callousness with his friend's body.
Through Mathis and Camille, Bond learnt some valuable lessons, in which he demonstrates in the final scene. M is shocked that Bond didn't kill Yusef. In this scene Bond is completely in control of his emotions. The similarity between Craig's Bond and Dalton's Bond, when he is interrogating Pushkin is uncanny. Bond had found his quantum of solace.
From being a monosyllabic, robotic performance by Craig, I've had a complete reversal on my opinion over Craig's portrayal in QoS. I find it now to be a beautifully nuanced performance, as Bond learnt to be 007. QoS was a subtly evolving Bond.
Daniel Craig's Performance in Skyfall
The most traditional Bondian adventure for Mr Craig, in many respects, what with SF's levity and grandeur.
In the PST, Bond is at the height of his powers, until M orders the “bloody shot”. From here, Bond is trying to “resurrect” himself, into the formidable agent he once was.
We see Bond next in a beach hovel, and his apathy and pity are rather rampant. It's only because MI6 is under attack the Bond returns home.
We get to see Bond's apathy and self neglect in short order, a call back to Fleming's later novels.
Bond, as we see in M's apartment (I though she told Bond not to break into her house?), is still pissed, from drink and with M. Once again, M doesn't trust Bond, to get the job done. Or as Bond put it “you lost your nerve”.
Bond remains rather brusque and insouciant throughout SF. Perhaps he was playing to the crowd?
The injury is still causing Bond problems, so he digs the bullet fragments out, after his woeful tests. He found that his arm was shaking, not ideal for a marksman.
Despite him falling his tests, M allows Bond back on active duty; M is trying to apologize? Only Mallory sees through it.
Both Bond interactions with Eve and Q are provocative. Bond is seeing if they would raise to the bait; when they give as good as they get, Bond seems satisfied.
When Bond encounters Severine, he is not fooled by her blunder, Thanks Vesper!
Bond still has the appreciation of the finer things in life - “perfect” he says to the bar woman.
Bond's shoulder is still giving him trouble; he only just hung on under the lift. It's because of this, and his age, that he adapts his fighting style. In a similar style to the change between the brutal style of DN and FRWL, and the more stylised style of GF.
The fight in the Macau Casino is a prime example. Bond raises his glass to his would be assailants, before fighting them. Note that Bond isn't too concerned when the thug grabs Bond's gun in the Komodo Dragon nest; he was using it to stall, while the Komodo Dragon got into position. The script writers gave Craig too many one-liners in SF; it dilutes Craig's more earnest portrayal.
Two sequences that scream Fleming are – Bond placed his life in Severine's hands; a gamble on whether she would take him to Silva. And the second in when Bond, cornered by Silva and his thug in Scotland on top of the frozen lake. With no other option, Bond plunges him and the thug into the lake; Bond had no advantage on top of the lake, so maybe he would have better luck underwater – changing the game.
Onto Silva. Silva is trying to unsettle Bond, having him tied to a chair, and trying to shake his belief in M, by revealing Bond did not, in fact, pass the tests. And by advancing on Bond. Bond is equal to both of them – firstly Bond didn't expect to pass his tests (Bond's face when M said he passed the tests was of shock), and secondly Bond is jaded by the physical things.
I think Bond was feigning, when he attempted to shot the glass off Severine's head. Bond had a gun pressed to his head by one of Silva's goons, when Bond has the dueling pistol.
After Silva kills Severine, the goons guarding Bond, visibly relax. Which Bond was waiting for – he takes the goons out in short order. The quip, “waste of a good scotch” was Bond wanting to keep up appearances for Silva; he would expect Bond to be cavalier about it, even if Bond's not.
The first half of SF is especially good, at delving into Bond's psyche. The second half of SF, however, is gives us more an expositional take on Bond – the deaths of Bond's parents for example. The film makers got it just right – delve too much into Bond's back story, and you lose that mystique.
Bond's final scene with Dench's M, is emotional. Despite the hash she made of running MI6, she did get one thing right – Bond. And Bond needed to hear that.
Bond's journey in SF was a hard one. He had to “resurrect” himself. But he did it. By the end of the movie, Bond was back. The beginning and end of SF see Bond at the height of his powers. And Bond's struggle in the middle third was quite diverting. Bond is a fighter, and he made it. It's a similar case to LTK in that regard. In the beginning and end of that film, Bond is typically cool, composed and charming. But for the majority of LTK, Bond fights with his heart, making his aim sloppy. It's only after he discovers about the Stinger Missiles, that he's able to treat it like any other mission.
Reflection -
At the end of CR, we thought that Bond was back, a fully formed agent, hence the theme music. Then we got QoS.
At the end of QoS, Bond learnt his lesson, hence the gun-barrel at the end, signifying Bond was back. Then we got SF.
At the end of SF, we got the traditional office, and all Bond's cohorts have been introduced. What will B24 have in store for us?
We still haven't seen a Bond movie from Craig, in which he can be Bond, full of the gentlemanly conduct and charm, and Joie de vivre that one expects. Until that moment, I'm holding out on judging Craig as 007. But it's looking promising.
Certainly Craig has given us more to dissect in his three film, than the previous twenty. Which brings me on to the question, what would the other five Bond's would have made of Craig's material?
If you've read this far, I salute you. These are some of my ramblings thought about Craig's performances.
Good insights and comments though royale.
To quote Koskov "Superb, Mr Bond, superb".
[man crush]Dalton is just.. perfect, this is exactly how I picture Bond.[/man crush]
What more can I say, before the end of the pre-titles sequence, Dalton makes the role of Bond his bitch. Thrilling with copious amounts of intrigue, it's sets the tone for the romantic spy thriller to come. It's common knowledge that Dalton read all the Fleming books prior to filming, and was often seen mining one of them for inspiration during filming. It shows in his performance, especially in the scene in Pushkin's hotel room, which is not only my favourite scene in the film, but in the series too.
Kara is still my favourite Bond Girl, d'Abo brings the right amount of innocence. Someone mentioned a likeness to Natassja Kinski. I see that too, and while I would have been curious to see Kinski as a Bond Girl, I don't think she could have given off that same naïveté that d'Abo did. I feel that Kinski would have been better suited to a more aggressively sexual character like Goldeneye's Onatopp.
The villains, or rather Koskov, isn't exactly threatening. But I don't have a problem with that. Afteral, Koskov has Necros to carry out his dirty work if needed. Whittaker is my favourite of the 3 villains. His military fascination feels like it could have come straight from the pages of the Fleming books.
John Rhys-Davies makes for a jovial, likeable ally. I take it the idea was for Pushkin to have taken over from Gogol. I would have liked to see more of Pushkin, that is, had Dalton continued with more films.
Saunder is the films sacraficial lamb, whom starts of as staunchly bureaucratic but begins to develop a respect for Bond, moments before his death.
Felix... yes, even I can't defend John Terry. I don't Terry is the worst Leiter, he's just unremarkable. I've said it before, Stacy Keach would have made a superb Felix Leiter. He could have done more with the same material.
Bond working with the Mujahideen, is problem for some viewers, but not for me. The film was made in 1987, it was a different world back then.
Lastly, there's the soundtrack by the one and only, John Barry. Though this turned out to be his last, he goes out on a high note. Exercise On Gibralter & Ice Lake Chase (seeing the V8 Vantage nose diving into the snow bank, during the chase, still makes me wince, and then cry) stand out.
The 2014 00Heaven
***1. The Living Daylights***
2. From Russia With Love
3. On Her Majesty's Secret Service
4. For Your Eyes Only
5. The Spy Who Loved Me
6. Octopussy
7. Dr No
8. Thunderball
9. You Only Live Twice
10. Live And Let Die
11. The Man With The Golden Gun
12. A View To A Kill
13. Goldfinger
14. Moonraker
15. Diamonds Are Forever
This right here is the best of Brosnan. It's such a shame that his films only got worse as the series progressed, and sadly, Brosnan would be part of the problem. But here, he's at his best.
During the hiatus between LTK and this one, so many people thought the Bond franchise was done. The Cold War was over. GoldenEye was able to bring Bond into the modern world and did so brilliantly.
Sean Bean's Alec Trevelyan was one of the best Bond villains ever. It was wonderfully played. Cool and calculating with a taste for vengeance that made him more than one-dimensional.
Also of note is Judi Dench's M. She broke new ground as the first woman to play the character. She played M as a no nonsense leader who made sure Bond knew what his place was.
This film is a bit weird in the sense that it doesn't really feel like a true Brosnan, 1990s Bond film. GoldenEye is technically not a Brosnan film (in my opinion), and it feels more like a Dalton film. The tone is darker than the other Brosnan films, and despite the fact that it mostly takes place in 1995, it feels like it took place in the 1980s! [The Russians are the bad guys just like in The Living Daylights, the Russian Federation soldiers are wearing Soviet-era uniforms, and the tone feels like a Dalton film from the late-80s.] Given that Dalton dropped the role in 1994, after writing already started, and Brosnan only came on a few months later, I doubt they wanted to rewrite the script just for Brosnan.
I give It a 8.5/10.
Does anyone else get that 'Timothy Dalton film with Pierce Brosnan in it' vibe from GoldenEye?
Most people on these boards would agree with you.
We see PRECISELY eye to eye on this!
^:)^
Those are very good points! Whittaker is quite Flemingesque and with some more consistent exposure in the film he could potentiallly have been a memorable villain.
And for the sake of continuity and emotional conection it would have been so great with more interraction between Dalton and Pushkin in later films. But yet again Dalton's Bond era proves to be one of lost potential. Its such a shame he didn't get to do more, for SO MANY reasons.
Potential.
I think that Skyfall is the second best Bond film of them all. Sure, from a director's point of view perhaps Casino Royale is better, but as a Bondfan, you simply have to love it!
To begin with, the pre-title sequence is bloody amazing! It throws you right into the action! Those who says that Craig and Harris does'nt have any chemistry obviously as not seen the movie. The whole bike chase is stunning yet exiting and when Bond is using his bike to get onto the train is... it's just amazing! Kleinman does a brilliant job with the titles and along with Adele it ends up being perfect. Then we're doing the "Bond is dead?!" thing again and at this point it is starting to get a bit... Well, boring to be honest. We all know he is alive. After the first 10 minutes, when MI6 has been blowed up, you can feel that this is a very different type of Bondfilm. Jamie returns and we get some great scenes as he is getting fit for duty again. I would also like to point out that I LOVE Gareth Mallory and Q! Fiennes and Ben W are both great in their parts.
As soon as we move to Shangai it all becomes even more amazing! Roger Deakins is the best person that has ever worked with the Bond looks! The fight with Patrice and the scene inside the casino is beautiful! I also love Bonds swag as he is walking around in his tux. I did'nt really care much for Severine before my latest viewing, but after tonight, atleast I accept her as a Bondgirl.
The first shot of Silva is very impressing and Bardem plays him brilliantly! Then they kill off Severine (Who was only there so Bond would have someone to sleep with...) and Bond captures Silva, witch I love! Sure, the helicopters might not be perfect CGI, but it's still such a Bondian moment.
I am very fond of Bond in London so the parts that are shot there are my favourites. M:s meeting with Silva, Q:s hacking, the chase. It's wonderful. The shootout is also one of the best scenes in all of Bond. An then... we have the DB5... I won't say more than that.
The ending is stunning, and I think Kincade is awesome. Everything is perfect!
Essentially, almost everything wrong with Die Another Day is what was wrong with Tomorrow Never Dies and The World is Not Enough, but taken to the next level. Die Another Day is your dad trying too hard to be "hip and cool" in front of all your friends. If he stopped trying to be something that he's not, he actually would comes across as pretty awesome. Just like Brosnan's previous two outings, Die Another Day starts off with a lot of potential. Bond infiltrates a renegade North Korean colonel's diamond smuggling operation, gets caught out, kills the colonel and is subsequently detained and tortured for 14 months by the colonel's father. Honestly, the premise sounds pretty badass and could lead to one of the greatest Bond films ever made, but the first sign that things are about to head for the worse is when we hear Madonna's ear-bleeding, cat-homicide sounding excuse for a title song over images of Bond's torture. So much for that tension. However, the potential continues to rise after when Bond is traded for Zao, Colonel Tan-Sun Moon's henchman. Now Bond is back in the west, in a foreign, post 9/11 world, and has to deal with being abandoned by his government for over a year and being responsible for setting a dangerous terrorist free. This film could write itself, unfortunately it doesn't and instead, after a very promising first half, the film noes dives spectacularly. Aside from a few hints of what is to come (the plastic surgery and Jinx - we'll talk about her in a second), the first 1/3 to one half is pretty promising. It's right after the terrific sword duel that things go sour fast. I have so many questions for Lee Tamahori and the creative team: Why bring Colonel Tan-Sun Moon back as the generic, sniveling Gustav Graves when you could use Zao in a much more interesting way? If you must have Gustav Graves, why not actually play around with the idea of having a villain deliberately base his alter-ego on Bond? Why have an Ice Palace? Why have an invisible car if it's completely impractical in the snow? WHY RIP OFF THE PLOT OF DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER WHEN IT DIDN'T WORK THE FIRST TIME? Yep, instead of taking the movie in a more interesting, character-based direction, with a less grandiose plot and potential for real character development, Die Another Day blatantly rehashes the ridiculous plot to the worst official Bond movie ever made... right down to the plastic surgery subplot. It defies all logic.
Speaking of defying logic, why is Halle Berry a successful actress? I'm sorry, but she was only good like once... if that. Here she really kicks-off her downward decent by playing the unnecessary and obnoxious Jinx. Easily the worst Bond girl in the series, Jinx is another element of the film trying too hard to be cool. She absolutely does not need to be in this film one bit and was only cast because people would recognise her on the poster. And if fans though Stacey Sutton and Christmas Jones were vapid bimbos, Jinx was about to change the game forever. I guess she was meant to be "tough and feisty" but the combination of Berry's lackluster acting and the atrociously witless writing make her a pain in the ass to watch. She's the overdone "Bond-equal girl" cliche and not even done well. You don't have to make the Bond girl "tough agent" just like Bond in order to make her a strong female lead. Luckily they realised this by Casino Royale or we would have had Vesper running into Bond at the Miami airport and taking-out Obanno just in the nick of time, shudder. Another hiring problem was the director, Lee Tamahori; a man obsessed with turning the franchise into a gigantic music video. From a strange filter over the opening scene to gratuitous speed-ramping in every second shot, Tamahori lives up to his reputation as a Z-list, generic, Hollywood action director. He doesn't seem to have any artistic sensibilities or respect for the material (in fact, he even wanted to validate the Code-name theory into this movie at one point). He shouldn't have been allowed near the director's chair, but, in following the trend set by the previous movies, he was the natural choice.
That's not to mention the moment Bond actually surfs the big kahuna. This is the Bond equivalent of jumping-the-shark or nuking-the-fridge; there was no coming back from this. Does anyone remember the special featurette on the Die Another Day DVD where the woman is bragging about how good the CGI wave looks? Did she honestly believe that? The special effects in the film are pretty fake looking, even for the time. They're not quite "Diamonds are Forever bad", but they're cringe-worthy in their own right. Remember when Bond stunts were real and awe-inspiring instead of shitty CGI? Well Tamahori sure doesn't, I don't think he's even seen a Bond movie. Which is ironic given my last point; the references. THIS MOVIE MARKS THE 40th ANNIVERSARY OF BOND! Just in case anyone missed the subtle nods. I won't subject anyone to a comprehensive list but there are so many in this film. Every shot of this movie wants to remind you of better Bond films (or worse ones, if you count the plot as a "reference" to Diamonds are Forever). If the movie was any good, it would be a distraction, but, seeing as it's not, it does makes an excellent Bond Drinking Game. WARNING: May result in alcohol poisoning.
To wrap up my the point of my rant, Die Another Day is a terrible Bond film. It's just above Diamonds Are Forever because the first third is fairly decent and some of the action is survivable. It's a film bad enough to cause the producers to reboot the franchise and I can't recommend it unless you want to play an intense drinking game. I give it a 2.5/10.
The Living Daylights.
I have always loved this film, since I first saw it back in 1987. After growing up with the Moore films having a new actor in the role was a refreshing change. Whilst Moore has always been a favourite AVTAK did I feel take Moore one film too far. With Dalton in the role he was younger. He appeared more like Flemings Bond (at least at the time he did) He looked far more dangerous. The new Bond was a welcome change. With the stunning PTS on Gibraltar and the early scenes in Bratislava which takes a nice dose of Fleming's short story 'The Living Daylights'.
Dalton fits the Bond role perfectly, his no nonsense approach is great. He's confident and a very good actor. His scenes with Robert Browns M are excellent, and similar to those of Connery and Lee.
The mission at times can get a little complex. But is always exciting and well played.
The defection of Koskov and the way Kara is involved is well staged. Saunders and Bond frosty relationship is also worth noting. Saunders by the book approach does not sit well with Bonds cavalier attitude.
The film twists and turns as we see Bond unravel the pieces of the puzzle of why Koskov faked his defection and what his plans with Whitaker are well thought out. As is the relationship that forms between Bond and Kara over the course of the movie. It's certainly one of the better female roles of the series, and Maryam d'Abo does well in the role. Naïve and innocent, yet strong when required.
The villains of the piece are an area of dispute. Koskov is a little to soft and weak to be a real threat. Yet he is conniving and ruthless. He simply orders things to happen via henchman Necros. Both Koskov and Necros work alongside American arms dealer Brad Whitaker who operates from a mansion in Tangier. The role is never really fleshed out, and Whitaker doesn't get enough to do (imo). His love of all things military is an interesting side. The final scenes in his house are a little underwhelming, yet tie up all the loose ends of the story. By far the best villain of the film would be Necros. A real chameleon. Utterly ruthless. It is Necros that poses the biggest threat to Bond and anyone else that gets in his way.
The action set pieces of TLD are a real highlight, from the opening on Gibraltar, to the Aston Martin chase that ends up being a race to the Austrian border on a cello case.
And of course the wonderful cargo net fight, which I feel I need not prattle on about again. It's stunning, I'll leave it at that.
The Living Daylights is a really different film after seven films with Roger Moore. Timothy Dalton really throws himself into the role of OO7, and has really tried to make his characterisation of the character as close to Fleming as possible. For me he succeeds. It's an amazing debut for the part.
Notable highlights for me would be:
The excellent PTS
The defection of Koskov, and setting up the relationship of Saunders and Bonds instinct not to kill Kara.
The meeting at Blayden safe house and Necros' infiltrating it.
Bond winning the trust of Kara in Bratislava and their escape to Austria.
(Whislt the scenes with the Aston Martin and the cello case can get a little silly, they are so well staged and fun, that I just go along with it.)
Bond and Kara in Vienna, and the mutual respect that grows between Bond and Saunders.
Bond and Saunders at Prater park. And Saunders demise. It's a wonderful scene.
Bonds interrogation of Pushkin.
(It's one of the highlights of the film. Dalton and John Rhys-Davies are splendid. I only wish that Pushkin could've been seen in more Bond films)
The faked assassination of Pushkin by Bond.
The battle at the Russian airbase is nicely shot, and the aforementioned plane fight with Bond and Necros.
The fight with the jailer and many of Karas lines around this scene always raise a smile.
Kara- "You were fantastic. We're free."
Bond - "Kara, we're inside a Russian airbase in the middle of Afghanistan."
Speaking of the Russian airbase scenes and Bond working with the Mujahideen seems out of date now, but I can overlook this as it is part of history. It's never a problem for me. And Kamran Shah is a likable ally for Bond to work alongside.
The locations and cinematography of TLD are wonderful and colourful. From the snow climate of Czechoslovakia, to the sunny desert regions of Afghanistan, The Living Daylights is beautiful to look at. Add to this a wonderful and sadly final score from John Barry, and you are well on your way to an excellent Bond entry.
The acting, characters and story make TLD probably the best Bond film since TSWLM, but possibly even OHMSS.
Taking Bond back to a more Flemingesque approach is a welcome return and Dalton as I have said is a wonderful Bond.
I love The Living Daylights, and will continue to sing the films praises for many more years to come I'm sure.
Benny's Blu-Ray Bondathon ranking:
1. On Her Majesty's Secret Service
2. From Russia With Love
3. The Living Daylights
4. Octopussy
5. The Spy Who Loved Me
6. For Your Eyes Only
7. Goldfinger
8. Thunderball
8. Doctor No
10. Live And Let Die
11. You Only Live Twice
12. A View To A Kill
13. Moonraker
14.The Man With The Golden Gun
15. Diamonds Are Forever.
(My top three are a probably a joint first as I find it hard to choose between them)