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 just made me realise why TND is my No 2 Brosnan film and not my No 1.
Quote: Overall, the supporting cast is nowhere near as strong as in GE. End Quote:
That's really it I think. I tried many times to find out what exactly it is that prevents me of finding TND better than GE.
:D
Thanks. Really enjoyed it this time around (but I always do).
Yes, I think the supporting cast in GE is tremendous. They make that film. I'm about to watch it again (after a long absence) and will report back. Not sure how it's going to go (GE is so highly ranked for me that I'm fearful it could fall...). Let's see how it goes.
It's definitely very polarizing and not for everyone.
I had my doubts, but Casino Royale really is that good. It's the attention to detail. For example, as someone pointed out recently, the caviar during dinner with Vesper. Campbell's direction is always engaging and while all the action scenes were perhaps a little too long, I am never wishing that they be over sooner.
The producer's stripped Bond down considerably during the reboot, and I thought that it would make me yearn for the fun and twinkle of the formulaic entries. But there is a cleverness and style in this film that makes it undeniably Bond, the audience gets to learn about all the characters and I love the minor character development scenes early on. So because of this, and it wasn't an easy decision because I love both, but Octopussy has been pushed to 2nd place. And now Casino Royale is nipping at the heels of The Living Daylights. I think the Barry score gives TLD the edge over CR. That's not to say I dislike the latter's score. It's great when the theme song features, the rest of it blends into the background but doesn't distract like in Goldeneye.
So with two films to go and the first Craig one out of the way, I can safely say I still have 6 actors in the top 6.
1. The Living Daylights
2. Casino Royale
3. Octopussy
4. From Russia with Love
5. On Her Majesty's Secret Service
6. Goldeneye
7. For Your Eyes Only
8. Tomorrow Never Dies
9. The Spy Who Loved Me
10. Dr No
11. Moonraker
12. Diamonds are Forever
13. Licence to Kill
14. You Only Live Twice
15. A View to a Kill
16. Goldfinger
17. The Man with the Golden Gun
18. Thunderball
19. Die Another Day
20. Live and Let Die
21. The World is Not Enough
Some observations:
- Octopussy has always scored high but I had not expected it to be 3rd
- GE suffers mainly from the score. Campbell's direction is great and love the characters so it stays in 6th for now
- Enjoyed FYEO a lot this time around, same with Dr No
- Can't separate TSWLM and MR
- Never liked the Hamilton films but didn't expect LALD so low.
- 14-16 are hard to separate. They are listed in rewatchability order.
- Did not expect TWINE to place last. Apart from the PTS it's not very enjoyable.
I am really curious to see how I feel about this film today, as it’s been many years since I’ve watched it. Always one of my favourites, will it hold up now?
Overall Experience:
I’m happy to report that it does hold up today……resoundingly in fact. It is not as contemporary as the just watched TND, which is far more modern, but that is in its favour. This is still Brosnan’s best, and also his only classic imho.
Notable Positives (imho):
-Martin Campbell really gets James Bond. He knows how to portray Bond on screen…..what Bond should convey and what he absolutely must not convey. How he should act. What imagery to include. How to hook us and draw us in. It’s a pity that idiots like Apted and to a lesser extent Tamahori do not know this.
-Brosnan is damn good in this one. It may not be book Bond, but there’s no doubting he was definitely on his way to being a good screen Bond at this point. Things obviously took a turn for the worse somewhere during his run, but this is a superb, if somewhat tentative debut. None of the funny faces or overt sentimentality that characterized his later portrayals here….. he’s very restrained and that suits his Bond portrayal best. The more he tries to get himself out of the Bond character noose in later films and bring more depth to his characterization, the more he just lost his Bond”ness” to me. Take for example the way he reacts to Alec’s betrayal here. Understated and Bondian (if a little reserved). Compare that to his reaction in similar circumstances to Electra, and even Miranda. Night and day…. I’m sure he felt he was being more dramatic in those films, but to me he was not acting like Bond in those instances……here he definitely is. I remember the first time I saw this film (after the long break and after Dalton). I instantly thought to myself ‘thank goodness…..cool Bond is back’. Interestingly and ironically, when I saw Craig in the pretitles of CR, I thought the same thing, indicating that my view of Brosnan had notably changed over his tenure, for the worse, even as he had spread his wings creatively in the role.
-Sean Bean – tremendous. Easily a top 5 villain of the series as 006. Love the way he delivers his lines and owns the screen whenever he’s on. He’s young, modern & yet a throwback to the greats. I don’t think we’ve seen better until Bardem’s OTT Silva, and Bean is perhaps even better than him.
-Famke Janssen – absolutely epic as Onatopp. Again a throwback, she’s a larger than life henchwoman who is up there with the all time greats. Perfect casting…. The only negative is she is a little derivative of (and potentially inferior to) NSNA’s Fatima Blush…..but apart from that just perfect….
-Isabella Scorupco – Natalya is my favourite Bond girl of the last 34 years (yes, I even prefer her to Vesper…just). She can do no wrong in my eyes. Modern, intelligent, resourceful and yet not a feminista like some other Bond ‘women’ (cough….), nor a ‘Bond equal’ (chuckle….) like even others. Totally delectable too, even in her naff Ruski sweater. I’ll voluntarily be her ‘boy with toy’ any time. Nuff said.
-Gunbarrel music - outstanding intro and great turn and shoot from Pierce (resoundingly the best of all the actors actually)
-Trevelyn’s lair at the end is very Ken Adam’esque and this film’s ending is easily the best of the last 20 years imho……no sentimental b/s….just a simple, clean hand to hand fight and some great build up tension during the ‘pen bomb’ scene. I love the part when Natalya beats the crap out of Boris as well.
-There is a simplicity to this film that is very refreshing (in terms of the 4 Brosnan films I’ve seen to date in my Bondathon). An old-school flavor that evokes the past without being derivative of it. Difficult trick to pull off. Campbell does it here, and he does it with CR as well.
General observations (imho):
-Casting: Masterstroke. Superb all round including the supporting cast. Alan Cumming, Tcheky Karyo, Gottfried John all own the screen and Joe Don Baker, Judi Dench, Samantha Bond & Coltrane are all well cast.
-Action sequences: average to below average in general. Tank sequence is poor pastiche, and the escape from Ouromov’s clutches preceding it is nothing to write home about. It’s very spartan compared to TND in particular, and there are very little set pieces. The end fight between 006/007 is one of the series’ best however, primarily because we get to see their faces (not obvious stuntmen) during the fight…..and it’s very visceral.
-Pacing is surprisingly slow in places, and certainly much more so than DAD & TND, which move along at a much faster pace. This is a relatively ‘talky’ Bond film, and it’s a bit surprising looking back on it now (because it didn’t feel that way when I first saw it). Pacing is not one of its stronger suits.
-Score: Love it. I’ve always thought highly of Serra’s work. It sounds fresh and suspenseful, and incorporates the Bond theme in a subtle way in its signature motif. Creative and inventive, I think it’s much better than a lot of Arnold’s generic pastiche Barry-lite work that followed. It fits the film like a glove, a bit like Newman’s SF score.
-Title Song: the best of Brosnan’s era. Tina Turner was born to sing a Bond tune and she belts it out very well here. Reminiscent of Shirley without being derivative. Still sounds fresh today. Love it.
Funniest moment: Oromov checking out Onatopp’s orgasm after she machine guns all the Goldeneye programmers.
Best scene: the return of the Aston Martin, this time innovatively pit against a modern Ferrari in that absolutely tremendous post-titles Monte Carlo chase evoking GF & To Catch a Thief.
-Other comments – this film had a pretty low budget at the time and it shows in places. There is some obvious model work in Russia at the Goldeneye facility and painfully dated CGI when the MIG’s explode. I really like the scene of Bond flying into a location and leaving the airport (something we saw with both Connery’s and Moore’s debut as well). Craig also got to do this in the Bahamas in CR. It’s a must for a new Bond.
-Worst part: Eric Serra’s absolute POS ending song
Line of the film:- There are so many absolutely awesome lines in this flim imho that I can’t mention them all, but if I was to name a few that sum it up, it would be these:
“F or England James? No,…..for me”
“Am I supposed to feel sorry for you? No…..you’re supposed to die for me”
“Kill her…. She means nothing to me”
Summary:
So I tried to ask myself, ‘why do I love this film and why is it so successful and endearing with the fanbase’? It doesn’t have the best action sequences (far from it in fact), the pacing is relatively slow…..so why does it work so well and why has it resonated after all these years?
Well, first of all, this is a stripped down and very tight thriller. Firmly a case of ‘less is more’. Somewhat 60’s style in the way it moves and in the way in which it is filmed. The cold war elements (Russia etc.) add to this feeling, and it’s the last time we’ve seen that in a Bond film. It’s very similar to TLD in this manner. Retro-cool is the word.
After the somewhat pedestrian visuals that characterized the John Glen era, this film also puts the glamour back to James Bond as well. It feels ‘old school’ glamourous and is also somehow romantic. This is a trick Campbell does again with CR.
Even the acting has a certain intentional 60’s OTT camp nature to it, which is very nostalgic and endearing (evokes and similar to Lotte Lenya’s OTT turn in FRWL). It is a welcome change to me after the hyper reality of some the last Glen entries.
This film also has great characters/characterizations. To me, this is unquestionably the real winning attribute of this film. Top notch casting/characters and superb, charismatic acting by all concerned. The weakest and most uncertain link actually could be Brosnan, but as I’ve said before, all he has to do is show up here, the supporting cast is so good. In a way, this is very much like SF in that regard. This film, like that one, is almost stolen & hijacked by the brilliant talent of the supporting cast, with Bond almost a bystander in his own film. This is different from Campbell’s CR, where Bond is a critical and dominant part of the narrative.
These lessons should be simple, but as EON has proved time and time again, it’s really not.
Well that ends my Brosnan run. TWINE was, as always, a stinker. GE still rules, conclusively. I’m glad I viewed them this way around (from previously perceived worst to previously perceived best). Even though my ranking did not change, I managed to appreciate the positives in all of them this way.
Current Bondathon Ranking
GE (clear winner and Brosnan’s only classic)
TND (much higher than DAD but too derivative)
DAD (much higher than TWINE but too comedic)
TWINE (the title artist says it all for me)
Next up: The Roger Moore years, starting with AVTAK (not one of my favourites). My reviews will be much shorter as I move along, I promise.... Cheers.
Great write up. The only parts I disagree with are: I think the pacing is good, and Serra's score is what keeps this film from ranking higher. It looks and sounds dated and that may lower its ranking on future viewings, but Campbell and the cast make the film worth the watch and so it keeps its place in the top 6.
Hm, those are descriptions I have certainly never related to Goldeneye. "Less is more"? For me it is one of the most exaggerated and OTT films in the series. And could you elaborate on what you mean by "60's style"? But enough of that... :)
In general a very good review as always, although we disagree on a lot of things, most notably the supporting cast. I like Coltrane, John and Janssen (although I find her character to be slightly exaggerated) but Beam and Scorrupco come across as far to melodramatic for me, and Cumming is incredibly annoying! But I guess its all a matter of taste.
That being said I am very much looking forward to reading your coming reviews! :)>-
Thanks... I think I noticed the slower pacing in comparison to the recently watched TND & DAD, which really move along much faster. I was surprised by the feeling, but I'm sure it's because of the order in which I watched them. I realize Serra's score is very polarizing to the fan base....I happen to like it, but I know it's not for everyone
The 'less is more' came, purely due to the order in which I recently watched these films. This one is definitely so much more stripped down compared to DAD/TND, which are more extravagant and ambitious in villain's plot. There's a certain simplicity here compared to those other films, which I really felt after just watching the others.
The 60's style is more to do with the outfits/cars (Russian uniforms, Natalya's drab outfit, Famke's big hat outfit, The Aston, which at that point had not appeared for 30 years), and the settings (St. Petersburg, Monte Carlo evoking To Catch A Thief, Russian train etc.) as well as the obvious OTT acting (I thought TLD also evoked this feeling in the same way with Krabbe similarly OTT....unlike for example TND, AVTAK, TSWLM, FYEO etc. etc. which are more contemporary). It's subtle.
I have a bias for Scorupco (dream girl material here) so admit that objectivity may be lacking, but I didn't feel Bean was too melodramatic. Agree on Janssen being over the top (it was definitely intentional imho) and Cumming being annoying and childish (I think this was also intentional though.....most of the performances in this film are exaggerated, but I think Campbell intended that and this is what gives it a somewhat 60's spoof flavour......not necessarily a 60's Bond flavour)
I agree. The dialogue is intentionally OTT exagerrated here. No doubt. It was always polarizing. Some (like me) love it, and I recall others really disliking it at the time. eg. "Lovely girl.......tastes like......like strawberries. I wouldn't know. I would!"
The beach scene came out of nowhere, but again, my bias for Scorupco allows me to forgive these small, sentimental indiscretions/misteps.
The script. It's good in parts, used to love it but I can see the other side of the argument.
I like all the villains, Onatopp and Boris are OTT but fun to watch, especially Boris's death.
It seems that recently (since OP) a lot of the movies have a scene like that, questioning Bond's motivations and job. I can see why Natasha feels this way but her thoughts are never resolved...Bond just kisses her until she likes it so it feels extremely out of place, they pulled it off heaps better in CR
But luckily it is short and doesn't ruin the film completely! :)
In the commentary for that scene Campbell says its very difficult to pull off a scene like that convincingly and he had them both rehearsing it for several hours the night before.
Personally, it's flawed but I don't think it's the worst "dramatic" scene in the series. That honour goes to a certain scene in TWINE. Not only bad acting from Brosnan but also weak acting from Marceau and melodramatic writing.
I don't know what to say other than I might consider TWINE the best Brosnan performance, and I like him as Bond. That's not a back handed compliment!
And there's nothing wrong with that.
I've tried to reflect on my distaste for his performance in that film in particular, and from my point of view it comes down to this:
I think each Bond actor who's had a relatively long run (more than 2) inevitably tends to bring more of his own personality to the role as time progresses. Less Bond and more the actor.
Moore certainly did, and I like Moore (I personally think he projects the closest to Bond 'when not acting' of all the actors) so I didn't mind him doing it, but I know many here who can't stand it. Connery did the same in DAF (it's more Connery than Bond if you think about it). Brosnan did the same, most dramatically (pun intended) in TWINE, and I personally found it soap cheesy and un-Bondlike, but that's just me.
If I was to suggest one definitive element that he brought to the Bond universe, it would be that overt sentimentality that is on display in TWINE (and which actually began on that beach in GE, which is being criticized on this thread, but not by me because I found it reasonably balanced in his first film). It's not my cup of tea, but I understand why many don't mind it.
I'm doing other marathons like the Avengers movies, and Hitchcock,
but I feel like starting anew with the Bond movies until Spectre hits the theaters.
I don't want to do it chronologically as I always do.
But I don't want to do it totally random either.
Can you give me suggestions what order would be clever to watch the Bond movies, I like to have some kind of concept.
I probably can watch 12-15 Bond movies up to Spectre's release. The rest I will watch afterwards.
Ideas very much appreciated, thank you.
That has been discussed on this thread before actually. Here are some of the many suggestions that came up from our forum members:
1. Personal ranking order
2. Book order
3. Your favourite film from each actor, then second favourite, third and so on...
Chronological is a bit of a bore, since we've all seen them that way so many times before.
Another way is to group by style of film, i.e.:
1. fantastical over the top
2. stripped down thriller
3. meaningful romance
4. run of the mill/by the numbers
5. etc.
I definitely sees what you mean. If one doesn't care much for Brosnan the actor, then a performance that feels more actory than Bondian will come off poorly.
I've always liked Brosnan as an actor however. He isn't my favourite actor by any stretch of the imagine, but I can get behind his intense dramatic performance. They feel genuine to me, for all their potential hamminess, if that makes any sense. He's going all out, putting the emotions out there.
Just to get this right, here is the order I think is correct, thanks for checking it :)
GE CR LALD LTK MR DAD DAF FRWL DN GF AVTAK FYEO QOS TB NSNA TSWLM OHMSS YOLT TMWTGG TWINE SF OP TLD TND
I put GE and TND as bookends.
Quite true.
Then, when I take on a further Bondathon, I am going to watch them in the order of my ranking to see if my views change.
A good way to rank them, after all I guess the most important thing is how enjoyable a movie is.
I just finished my chronologically done Bondathon but will start anew by order of the Fleming Books and Short Stories.
This time I'll throw everything over board ranking wise. My ranking has grown historically and I haven't changed it that much.
When I start I'll rank the movies like you do, purely on how I enjoyed them.
Cheers. Yeah I just like to do it enjoyment wise. For me, that's what it's all about.
I like the idea of doing a Bondathon in the order of the Fleming books, great idea.
Like You Only Live Twice, Connery seems somewhat unenthusiastic in the role. I wouldn't say he was bad, but it's just disappointing to watch after the great performances he gave in his first four Bond films. Tiffany Case was never one of my favorite Bond girls, and that really didn't change with this watch. Charles Gray's Blofeld is my least favorite version of Blofeld, and he'd probably rank among my least favorite Bond villains; he was just too campy and not menacing at all. I didn't care much for the rest of the supporting cast, but I will admit that Mr. Wint and Mr. Kidd are big highlights. Definitely two of the most memorable henchmen in the Bond series.
I didn't enjoy the PTS a whole lot. Barry's score was solid, and the title song was decent too. Really, my biggest problem with the film is the way they decided to continue from On Her Majesty's Secret Service; there is no mention of Tracy, Blofeld suddenly has hair and a fixed neck, and the tone is just so silly and weird. I enjoy some weirdness and occasional silliness in Bond films, but in this movie, it just felt awkward to me coming off its grounded (by Bond standards), emotional predecessor. Maybe it's an unfair criticism as its trying to be different, but the campy tone just didn't work for me this time around.
There's just not a lot that I particularly enjoy about Diamonds Are Forever. I guess if you want to see Connery in a sillier, campy Bond flick, then it's a good watch, but I just couldn't get into it like his other movies. I wished he had gotten a better send-off, but at least he had a great run at the start. For me, this is the first disappointment in the Bond series, and while I don't hate it, it's sure to rank near the bottom of my finalized list.
FoxRox's 2015 Bondathon Ranking
1. On Her Majesty's Secret Service
2. Goldfinger
3. Dr. No
4. Thunderball
5. From Russia with Love
6. You Only Live Twice
7. Diamonds Are Forever
This film has improved for me in every viewing since. Whilst there are one or two moments that could be lost from the film (or even toned down, slightly), this is the most confident debut for a new James Bond actor and a terrific film that honours Fleming.
The film's pre-title sequence sets this up nicely from a narrative point of view, showing us both of Bond's kills to become a 00 and Daniel Kleinman's inspired title design with the poker cards motif is just excellent.
Mads Mikkelsen is a strong, 21st century Bond villain with all the right levelS of maturity and there is great taunting between Bond and Le Chiffre at the game table.
For me, the freerunning sequence at the start of the film is a little overlong and presents Craig as a little too rough around the edges.
The film properly gets going from the Miami airport chase which is thrilling and presents Craig at peak physical condition.
Eva Green is brilliant casting for the enigmatic Vesper Lynd. Bond and Vesper's train conversation is another example of brilliant conversation writing in the Bond series. It's too people sat in a train compartment summing each other up but it develops great chemistry between the two actors.
Into Montenegro and all of the poker sequences are entertaining to watch *(this is coming from someone who has no idea how to play poker), particularly the big wins for both Le Chiffre and Bond. The moments in between with Bond and Vesper in the shower (the quieter moments) and the stairwell fight with Bond cleaning himself up in the hotel room bathroom are fantastic middle sequences in the film that establish that this Bond gets hurt physically - you feel every punch and kick.
For me, the only sequence that has caused problems every time I've seen it, where I feel that they could have approached this in a better way, is the poisoning of Bond and Vesper coming to his rescue. Whilst necessary to set up for the brilliant pay off line to Le Chiffre back at the game table, it feels like an experimental sequence in a film that is trying to go for the realism stakes. That said, this scene does improve with each viewing.
The torture sequence is pure Fleming yet it is still imbued with Craig's dry humour as Bond and the sequence works very well.
Falling in love with Vesper and Bond and Vesper in Venice is again a little overlong but again, it's set up for the ultimate climax - Bond loses the woman he trusted, for whom he would give everything up to be with. Bond is in a fragile state at the end of this film yet at the very end of the film we are given a confident "Bond, James Bond" and a blast of the Bond theme. If we were in any doubt of Craig's ability to play Bond before, the doubts are all but erased in those final moments.
Overall, this is an impressive film. For many fans, this is qunitessential Bond and top of the pile. I'm finding it hard to place this one. Whilst it's a terrific film and sets up Craig's Bond brilliantly, I am really torn between this and Skyfall. Technically, Royale is the stronger film and holds up better as a film as a whole but there is much to love about Skyfall including the re-introduction of classic Bond characters and motifs. I think Casino Royale just pips Skyfall to the post at the moment because of how confident the film is. Casino Royale was a gamble that paid off after the abysmal Die Another Day, and it worked.
My rankings so far:
1. From Russia with Love (1963)
2. Licence to Kill (1989)
3. OHMSS (1969)
4. Casino Royale (2006)
5. Skyfall (2012)
6. The Living Daylights (1987)
7. The Spy Who Loved Me (1977)
8. Dr No (1962)
9. Goldfinger (1964)
10. Thunderball (1965)
11. For Your Eyes Only (1981)
12. A View To A Kill (1985)
13. Octopussy (1983)
14. Tomorrow Never Dies (1997)
15. The World is not enough (1999)
16. The Man with the Golden Gun (1974)
17. You Only Live Twice (1967)
18. Moonraker (1979)
19. Live and Let Die (1973)
20. Quantum of Solace (2008)
21. Die Another Day (2002)
So, two weeks after starting this Bondathon I come down to the final two films to rank from the official series. Next up is ...... GOLDENEYE
This is one of those films in the series that I've always enjoyed but never quite seen the love for it that so many Bond fans have. I've generally thought that TND was a stronger outing for Brosnan and that Brosnan looks better in TND. Watching GoldenEye again, it's clear that this film is the best of the Brosnan bunch. After the six year break following another of my favourite films in the series, LTK, GoldenEye had to prove a lot to a lot of people. All the boxes had to be ticked. New 007 - tick - great locations - tick - new composer - partly tick (Eric Serra's score sometimes leaves a bad taste in the mouth) - new girls - definite tick (Izabella Scorupco plays one of the most beautiful women in the series and Famke Janssen goes to another level in playing Onatopp) - new MI6 regulars - Michael Kitchen, Samantha Bond, and most importantly Judi Dench have great material to work with here and all work brilliantly opposite Brosnan - new gadgets - wonderful little Q sequence here in Q's lab - new villains - some of the best the series has had and certainly the strongest bunch of the Brosnan Bond era; extra strength in that Bond worked with the villain before he turned from being his ally - Sean Bean plays this very well, and Gottfried John as the terrific Ourumov.
The only odd one out in a glittering cast is Alan Cumming as the insufferable Boris. The Russian accent is awful and every time he appears on screen I get irritated. Simply there for comic relief. Thankfully he has marginal screen time.
I've previously felt that the film lags in the second half and while it's true that the first half of the film is stronger, there are some terrific action set pieces in the second act with the tank chase and the sequence on the train being right up there in terms of action set pieces.
Brosnan is also terrific in his debut. I stand by the fact that he looks much younger than he actually is in this film - had he started in 1987 as originally intended, he would have looked far too young to play Bond - but he plays it well here, balancing sophistication, charm and sex appeal as Bond.
In reevaluating this film, GoldenEye is a strong outing for 007. The series needed a kick back to life after a six year break. Just as Moore skis off the cliff and parachutes to safety as a metaphor for the continued success of the series in Spy, so too Brosnan's bungee leap of faith off the dam in the pre-titles signals a return of classic Bond. It's just a shame that, in hindsight, we'd have to wait another 11 years for the Bond reboot to get this amount of classic again. All thanks to Martin Campbell.
My rankings so far:
1. From Russia with Love (1963)
2. Licence to Kill (1989)
3. OHMSS (1969)
4. Casino Royale (2006)
5. Skyfall (2012)
6. GoldenEye (1995)
7. The Living Daylights (1987)
8. The Spy Who Loved Me (1977)
9. Dr No (1962)
10. Goldfinger (1964)
11. Thunderball (1965)
12. For Your Eyes Only (1981)
13. A View To A Kill (1985)
14. Octopussy (1983)
15. Tomorrow Never Dies (1997)
16. The World is not enough (1999)
17. The Man with the Golden Gun (1974)
18. You Only Live Twice (1967)
19. Moonraker (1979)
20. Live and Let Die (1973)
21. Quantum of Solace (2008)
22. Die Another Day (2002)
The final film from the official series for me to review is.... DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER
TMWTGG
TSWLM
MR.
The second half of CR. She's seen only the first half
QOS
GE
TND.
TWINE and DAD will probably follow this week.
Notable Positives (imho):
This is the first film in my Bondathon (I started with the Brosnan run) that has a John Barry score, and my word, what a revelation it is to hear the great man doing his thing again in the pretitles. Apart from the inexplicable Beach Boys nonsense (a crime comparable to the TMWTGG slide whistle imho) it’s good to hear him in the saddle again. Although nowhere near his best, said score is obviously miles better than anything I’ve heard to date in my Bondathon
-coming off Pierce Brosnan’s films, Roger Moore’s confident voice and manner is very noticeable here. He’s much more relaxed as Bond than Pierce ever was (even in DAD), and despite his notable advanced years, projects his confidence with considerable ease on screen. His line delivery is also much more effortless and confident imho, like he’s not even trying. Bottom line: It’s good to see Moore as Bond again.
-Patrick Macnee as Sir Godfrey Tibbet –he’s great in this role….just great. He plays off Moore very well (I wish they had done more films together). He joins a long line of MI6 collaborators who meets an unfortunate, sad end after aiding James.
-Zorin/Christopher Walken – very good in the role of main villain. He’s suitably ‘unhinged’ and you can really believe he’s a psychopath. Walken underplays it a little too much I think (he can definitely be more exuberant than he is here and perhaps should have been…..like Silva) but he still gets to show off that diabolical grin of his from time to time. He’s not helped by the script/limited ambition of the film though, I think he'd have been so much better in a more epic Bond. Louis Jourdan’s Kamal Khan is far more memorable.
-Best scene – Eiffel Tower chase and Jump by May Day – epic, including Barry’s notable score at this point
General Observations (imho):
-Title Song – Duran Duran’s track is great, but it really doesn’t suit the film so much. A slightly harder edged track, it’s calling out for a younger Bond (Dalton?) in my view…..
-It’s been said before and it’s true – Moore is just way past it for the role at this point. He still looks very good for his age (3 years shy of 60 at this point), but credibility is lost here, and high definition blu ray does him no favours, with every line and wrinkle very noticeable. He seems noticeably older than everyone else, including his superiors at MI6. After just coming off seeing Pierce Brosnan in his prime as Bond in GE, it’s even more apparent to me. This is not a knock on his performance, which is as consistent as ever (he never gave a bad one imho) and in some ways more serious/better than in OP….just his noticeable age. He’s in full-on grandfather mode….
-Mayday – much better than I remember her. Suitably chilling in the earlier parts, you really do feel for Bond when he has the misfortune of jumping into bed with her. He claims to have ‘got off’. Well, he’s a better man than me…… Jones doesn’t overplay it though, and her turn to the good side and ultimate saving Bond is very touching.
-Stacy Sutton/Tanya Roberts – She is a strong, spunky character but Roberts plays her like a ditz.. she should have stuck to Sheena or Charlies Angels. I don’t know if Roberts was intentionally trying to act like this or not, but she joins Lupe/Soto and Bibi/Johnson as a low point for females in the series, and she’s definitely too young for ol Rog. Having said that, she is dreamily beautiful and has a great bod ….very easy on my eyes, … and blu ray does her a lot of favours.
-Stunt doubles – they are way too evident here (Paris Renault chase, Golden Gate bridge etc.). Way too obvious, and it takes one out of the moment
-Mistaaaaaaa Sin Juun Smith (aka St. John Smythe) – this disguise of Moore’s Bond is not effective for me. The problem is it’s a caricature of Moore’s Bond….a sort of funny extension of how he hams it up in the role from time to time, and so it’s easy for the viewer to confuse the disguise with Moore’s turn as Bond. For years, I did not like his performance in the stables, or when chatting up Stacy (comes across as old man sleazy) but I only realized later that it’s him in character as Smythe chatting her up rather than as uber cool Bond. “Killing Tibbet was a mistake” is the first line he utters as Bond in close to 40 minutes….and it’s vintage Moore delivery as Bond. I think he should have used a disguise more different from his Bond persona (a foreign accent perhaps), because it‘s confused me for years.
-Funniest scene – Bond’s helpless eye roll while being ‘taken’ by Mayday.
-Supporting cast – They’re ok. Nothing to write home about. Serviceable and inoffensive, if unmemorable.
-Other comments – this film has the somewhat pedestrian, made for tv look. Some criticize Glen for this in general, but it’s most notable here for sure. The locations and stunts are there…..but it’s a really quite drab, and the locations are not used to their best. The entire San Francisco section is woefully low end, starting with Howe’s office and moving to Stacy’s plantation style home (I thought I was in Savannah and not San Francisco). Additionally, Bond should not be seen sitting and having discussions by the kitchen table, at least not in my book….too domestic and a far cry from the grand days of TSWLM/MR in more ways than one. Furthermore, the plot is a very poor recycle of GF
-Action sequences – pretty poor imho. Opening ski sequence is by the numbers and doesn’t bring anything new to the franchise. The same goes for the horse chase. The most laughable is the escape from Howe’s office/Fire truck chase (absolutely awful and potentially a series low point). Lots of green screen here. The Golden Gate bridge idea is a good one, but is poorly executed imho…..Glen has done much better aerial work in nearly all his other Bond films.
-Great moment – hearing the famous John Glen “screaming man” again
Overall Impression:
Much better this time around. I’ve been unduly harsh in the past on this one. Everyone does a good job in it (except for perhaps Roberts) and it has the familiarity of a John Glen 80’s vehicle. Like an old shoe, it fits and moves along like we expect it to. However, that’s also its biggest problem, in that it’s not fresh at all……there’s too much familiarity here….. and it’s all been done better (and so much more glamorously) by Moore in his previous efforts, when he was noticeably younger. If he’d not done the far more entertaining and superior OP just before this one, I’d rank it higher. .
Key notable point and impression for me – I have never gone directly from a Pierce Brosnan Bond movie to a Roger Moore Bond movie in quick succession like I’ve done this time. Even though I’ve come off Pierce’s earliest and arguably best (GE) directly to Moore’s last and arguably worst (AVTAK) it is clear to me that Moore is a far superior Bond. It is not even comparable...there is so much more gravitas to Moore. This is not to say that Pierce is not good (he gets bashed unnecessarily in many cases), but Moore is definitely one of the greats…. Incredible screen charisma on display even at grandfather age & in a very poor (relatively speaking) Bond film
-
Current Bondathon Ranking
GE
TND
AVTAK (almost a tie with DAD)
DAD (almost a tie with AVTAK)
TWINE
Next up: FYEO
There is absolutely nothing to redeem this film. It's the single greatest "What if?" in the whole series - what if Lazenby had decided to think for himself and decide that it's not time to bow out of the series yet, could we have had a proper revenge thriller on our hands? Anything has to be better than this dull, limp effort.
Connery is waiting for his pay cheque, with not a bit of interest coming across in his performance. From the cringily bad pre-titles sequence with the dispatching of Blofeld's double, we know we are in for a completely different kind of film and this really is the start of the weakest era in the Bond series in my opinion.
Bassey's Diamonds are Forever is one saving grace at the start of the film but even that fails to take off when attached to Maurice Binder's lacklustre title design.
There are a couple of decent moments: Bond and M's prickly relationship is further developed and John Barry contributes some great melodies into the film's score but that's honestly about it.
Wint and Kidd are two of the strangest villains in the whole series.
Jill St John is a contender for worst Bond actress playing the bimbo Tiffany Case. She starts the film ok but by the end she is useless.
Bond's cremation and the moon buggy sequence add to the farcical nature of the plot and we are already an hour into the film by this point with absolutely nothing of interest.
The Felix Leiter in the film is also the weakest of the series.
Willard Whyte is quite possibly the most annoying character in the film - perhaps the whole series.
Blofeld in drag just about summarises this to be the worst of the Bond series.
The climax is limp and very disappointing when you compare it to everything that has come before it up to this point in the series.
Ultimately, the worst is definitely saved for last. Whilst there are no invisible cars or obvious soul destroying CGI moments in Diamonds, it has always been a painful watch. There is absolutely nothing to redeem this film in my mind. A wasted opportunity in the series that could have been so much better.
My final Bond rankings (let's see how many of you guys agree with me):
1. From Russia with Love (1963) - oozes class - pure Fleming and the best portrayal of Bond on screen.
2. Licence to Kill (1989) - vastly underrated film - Dalton IS Bond and Sanchez is the epitome of a Bond villain.
3. OHMSS (1969) - I would never have believed that a film I used to hate would be Top 3 but Lazenby won me over. Peter Hunt is one of the most skilled directors the series had.
4. Casino Royale (2006) - the most confident debut for a Bond actor - almost everything is perfect in Craig's debut. Such a contrast to DAD just four years earlier.
5. Skyfall (2012) - these two are neck and neck. The perfect 50th anniversary film - Craig is superb, Bardem provides the series with one of its best villains, and there's a whole lot to enjoy.
6. GoldenEye (1995) - again, a terrific Bond debut. Brosnan looks the part and Martin Campbell superbly brings Bond into the 90s and revitalises the genre after a 6 year break.
7. The Living Daylights (1987) - still a brilliant outing for my favourite Bond and an excellent Bond debut. Shame about the non-existent villains.
8. The Spy Who Loved Me (1977) - vintage 1970s Bond - the best of a very drab decade of Bond and definitely Roger Moore's best contribution to the series.
9. Dr No (1962) - where it all began - a simple story with great characterisation and an assured debut for Connery.
10. Goldfinger (1964) - the classic Bond film has a place in my Top 10 - all the elements gel together well in Connery's 3rd outing.
11. Thunderball (1965) - followed closely behind by Thunderball. A couple of years ago I would have had this near the bottom of my list but this viewing was much more enjoyable.
12. For Your Eyes Only (1981) - one of the most down to earth Bond performances from Moore - second best after Spy.
13. A View To A Kill (1985) - another film that surprised me. AVTAK is a lot of fun if you can get past the campy elements and Moore at almost 60 y.o.
14. Octopussy (1983) - a middle of the road Bond adventure but one of the better Moore films. India is still one of the best utilised Bond locations.
15. Tomorrow Never Dies (1997) - standard fare from Brosnan. I have normally had this ranked above GoldenEye, until I realised that was crazy. TND has its joyous moments but it's still 2nd best.
16. The World is not enough (1999) - again, another two films that are basically on a par with each other. TND just pips TWINE because it's pacier and there's more to enjoy.
17. The Man with the Golden Gun (1974) - no, it's not at the bottom of the pile. There was more to enjoy in the film than I realised. It's lazily written and a part of the worst era of the Bond series but Christopher Lee saves this from the trash can.
18. You Only Live Twice (1967) - we now approach the bottom of the pile with YOLT; largely dull with an uninspired performance from Connery. The film's saving graces are John Barry's score, Ken Adam's extraordinary set and Donald Pleasance's Blofeld.
19. Moonraker (1979) - again, not the worst of Bond but very close. This is definitely the weakest of the Moore era. Cashing in on the success of Star Wars, we get Bond in space. There are some strong sequences in the first half of Moonraker but it suddenly takes a downturn for the worse.
20. Live and Let Die (1973) - This was my biggest surprise from this Bondathon - I would never have put LALD this low in the past but nothing grabbed me this time around, save for George Martin's vibrant score and the title song and perhaps Baron Samedi. Everything else falls a little flat. Is it really worse than Moonraker? Probably not, but I found less to enjoy with this.
21. Quantum of Solace (2008) - far too rushed and disjointed, this is a film with little to redeem it. Craig is still great but Dominic Greene is so unmemorable, Camille is disappointing and everything feels flat.
22. Die Another Day (2002) -from the outset of this Bondathon this film was taking bottom place, until I finished watching the last film. There are truly unforgivable moments in this film and the film is literally all over the place. It tries to be audacious and innovative for the 40th anniversary of the franchise but feels like a chore to watch. Easily the worst Brosnan Bond.
23. Diamonds are Forever (1971) - Bottom place goes to DAF, the biggest missed opportunity in the series, and that is even worse than having a ton of CGI and invisible cars thrown in your face. The film is dull, the direction is lifeless and the acting, for the most part, is abysmal.
That's it, my Bondathon is complete. Until SPECTRE, see you in 6 weeks for my verdict and we'll see how high SPECTRE will be placed in this list. Thanks for following my Bondathon.