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
@Mathis1 Thank you!
Excellent stuff @FoxRox !
@GoldenGun Thank you!
Countdown to No Time To Die
Die Another Day, 2002
On that fateful Wednesday I decided to view DAD. I’m not sure whether it was to console myself or to compound the misery. My finely wrought schedule ruined! Now I have all the time in the world to complete this Bondathon.
The Good -
The action is where the film really stands out. The hovercraft chase and the Blades scene are great sequences, and even the ice chase between the two spy cars - the height of ridiculousness, I know - but, gosh darn it, it's just so much fun.
The score by David Arnold. Fitting the tone of the movie. In fact for some scenes, it heightened, nay rescues the film.
Lee Tamahori's muscular direction.
The Pikelet
The production values, especially Peter Lamont trying to go Ken Adam.
Bond going rogue in a novel fashion, trying to redeem himself.
Main titles given us a glimpse of Bond's torture. The segue into the main titles.
Raoul is a great little ally, and General Moon brings some gravitas to his one dimensional character.
The scenes with Bond and M crackle with tension.
Graves’ sneering villainy. This is what a deranged North Korean thinks Bond is, full of Western hypocrisy and swagger.
The Moonraker novel provided inspiration for the screenplay.
The exchange between Bond and Zao. Great dialogue between Bond and General Moon before it. Nice panning shot by Christian Wagner.
The cinematography is full of vim and vigour by David Tattersall. A step up from the rest of the Brosnan era films.
The look and colour of this film, being desaturated in the beginning and becoming more saturated as the movie proceeds. Fits the tone of the film nicely.
Bond attempting to kill Frost after she was exposed.
I have to disagree with Pierce Brosnan's assessment; he really did nail it on his fourth go. Full of the self confident swagger of Connery, and even his one liners, as bad as they are, lives up to Sir Rog.
“I’m just here for the birds”
"Maybe you've been down here to long..."
And the bad -
The teenageization of the Bond series reached its nadir with DAD.
Surfing. Both physical and CG. Sure getting three surfers on the wave is technically sound, but Bond doesn’t surf. Can you imagine Bond getting into the waves, being freezing cold in Cornwall, saying “Hang ten, bro!”. Please. The less said about that CG nonsense, the better. At least Arnold provides us with some nice music.
Whole scenes of CGI in a Bond film. Sure one can use it to touch up some effects, or remove them, such as the safety wires during the Madagascar chase in CR, but never having whole worlds created from CG.
The scene in which the ice dragster goes on a cliff. Terrible then, terrible now. As a 14 year old when I first saw this, one would imagine I’d be the ideal audience member. But no. I was embarrassed. I actually audible snorted in the cinema. The effects in said scene, were akin to a stop motion carrot being dangled off some badly rendered ice cliff.
Zao. What a god awful actor. I’ve seen more emotional range from a glass of water.
Jinx. Hammy performance, woeful dialogue.
So many not so subtle penis jokes.
Every other line is a quip in the 2nd half of this picture.
It’s as if Tamahori said to the cast, “you know Batman and Robin? I want you to deliver the lines exactly like that, only turned up to 11!”. The whole tone of film is dangerously close to a really bad comic movie.
The scene between General Moon and Graves is just jarring. A comic book romp being suddenly interrupted by some family drama? Choose one tone, but try not have different elements. But, one might say, what about the mauling of Corinne in MR? That was pretty dark moment in an otherwise light-hearted film. And one would be right, Difference is that was just a moment; MR had the charm to pull it off and the whole 70’s had this benign bizarre undercurrent to them. In DAD, it just seems out of left field.
Aston Martin Vanish.
Speed ramping/slow mo.
1. From Russia With Love, 10
2. On Her Majesty’s Secret Service, 10
3. Dr. No, 9
4. The Spy Who Loved Me, 9
5. Thunderball, 8
6. Goldfinger, 8
7. The Living Daylights, 8
8. Licence to Kill, 7
9. Octopussy, 7
10. For Your Eyes Only, 6
11. The World Is Not Enough, 6
12. You Only Live Twice, 6
13. Tomorrow Never Dies, 5
14. The Man With The Golden Gun, 5
15. GoldenEye, 5
16. A View to a Kill, 4
17. Diamonds Are Forever, 4
18. Moonraker, 3
19. Live and Let Die, 2
20. Die Another Day, 1
DAD saves LALD the ignominy of being last at least.
James Bond will return in Casino Royale**
*Disclaimer -
I’ve been having a gander at Joseph Darlington’s YouTube channel, in which he reviews the Bond movies. He’s got a good method of reviewing them, which I’m going to shamelessly steal. He rates his least favourite as 1 out of 10, his favourite as a ten, and the rest fits in between, kind of like grading on a curve. The Bond films are a genre unto themselves, and I shall be ranking them as their own little genre. Naturally, if I was rating them against other films, they would be high on the 1 – 10 scale. But, for this little game, I’m going to do something rather different.
**Come October time. Because some Chinese peasant decided to have batsoup for their lunch.
Usually I'm in a much more receptive mood for DAD's..... charms. But as the film went on, I was laughing at the film, not with it.
@Birdleson. I know you're a fan of the bridge sequence. What differs from you perspective to mine?
The PTS surfing was indeed technically excellent. But I'm struggling to see Bond partake in that particular activity.
Sobriety? Maintaining healthy relationships? Letting things go? Dealing with his insecurities? I can think of a few areas he can improve upon. :)
No, no, no, @STLCards3 -- he's great at being a solid drunk, great at losing relationships (with aplomb), great at holding onto issues, great at being insecure.
He doesn't have to improve at all!
i agree... my reply was a joke... The more flawed Bond may be, the greater he is... Because he overcomes the flaws to become the Hero... (Going back to Campbell and Jung).
I was clearly joking too.
Ah, balls to waiting until October time. So, over the past few days I watched the Craig era.
Casino Royale, 2006
Martin Campbell and Daniel Craig gave the Bond franchise a much needed kick up the bottom. Craig in particular has this emotional rawness, that I found memorizing. Like Sean Connery before, one can’t tear one’s eyes from Craig. A superb cast supports Craig and the direction from Campbell is assured and involving. Though it does appear that Craig is playing dress up in his Dad’s suits. Too lose in CR, too tight in SF and SP. But perfect in...
Quantum of Solace, 2008
Quite possibly the best looking picture in the Bondian canon. The locales, the cinematography, the colour palette, even the suits, are just gorgeous. Marc Forster’s direction is muscular and stylish. If one overlooks the hyper editing, this is a character study on Bond, which is why I tend to overlook its admitted weaknesses.
Skyfall, 2012
In the fight with a goon inside of the Komodo Dragon pit, something of note occurs. Having been let down by his body, Craig’s Bond decides to fight smarter, using his wits and gadgets to compensate. While previous to the events of Skyfall, Craig Bond was reliant on his physicality and tenacity to win. Bond has gone from brutal (as in CR and QoS) to a more stylised version of himself. Which is the same transition from the more brutal films of DN and FRWL to the stylish escapades of GF. Which regresses the refreshing and engaging character of Craig’s first two movies.
Still, until Silva is captured, SF is a treat to behold, especially Bond’s apathy, with plenty of Fleming touches. Berenice Marlohe is perhaps the most beautiful woman to ever grace a Bond film.
Spectre, 2015
Whilst watching SP, my dog was acting erratically during the main titles. So I muted Sam Smith’s whiny cacophony, his mewling caterwauling, and the dog was fine after that. Most odd.
I figured out an issue with SP. It has no urgency. It’s a slow paced film. That would be fine, if it was building up to something, such as Majesty’s, with has a similar pace. Where Majesty’s final act, is arguably the best of the entire franchise, SP delivers onto us a series of plopping farts. First the Brofeld debacle, then the lacking final act in London, all the while listening to Thomas Newman’s drudging score.
Yet, I can not help but like SP. There is a good amount of varied action, the balletic car chase through Rome (heightened by Newman’s cue outside of the Vatican, see you can do it if you tried!), reminiscent of Moore; the overblown vehicular chase in Austria, reminiscent of Brosnan and the truly epic show down between Messers Bond and Hinx on the train. It is unusual, nay frighting, to watch Craig’s Bond being so completely outmatched.
The picture itself has the retro, classic glamorous vibe about it. The work of Hoyte Van Hoytema, colour grading aside, has almost a tangible quality too it. Think of the scene in Lucia’s villa.
Mr. Craig has given me what I first asked from him, after completing CR. That being an insouciant, gentlemanly portrayal of our favourite secret agent, full of the joie de vivre that so encapsulated Fleming’s work.
When Bond is wining and dinning Dr. Swann on board the train, she asked whether Bond stops to think about his work, his life. Bond says he doesn’t, Dr. Swann persists, and then you see Bond hesitate and reflect. Fleming’s Bond, when thinking about this stuff, becomes melancholic. He knows he’s going to get killed before the mandatory retirement age for a Double ‘0.
In my write up for DAF, I surmised that Connery’s Bond was happy to go along with this ride, soaking up the glorious vices that come with being a spy, before, inevitably, being killed. You can see Craig has the same view. He’s experienced. He’s done it all. And he’s resigned him self to being an assassin until it kills him. Bond wants to experience life before he loses his life violently.
Until Dr. Swann puts the question mark in his head. Just because you’ve done something, it doesn’t mean you have to keep on doing it. I don’t believe that Bond loves Dr. Swann, just that he’s open to the possibility of finding a life away from the shadows.
1. From Russia With Love, 10
2. On Her Majesty’s Secret Service, 10
3. Casino Royale, 9
4. Dr. No, 9
5. The Spy Who Loved Me, 9
6. Thunderball, 8
7. Goldfinger, 8
8. Quantum of Solace, 8
9. Skyfall, 8
10. The Living Daylights, 8
11. Licence to Kill, 7
12. Spectre, 7
13. Octopussy, 7
14. For Your Eyes Only, 6
15. The World Is Not Enough, 6
16. You Only Live Twice, 6
17. Tomorrow Never Dies, 5
18. The Man With The Golden Gun, 5
19. GoldenEye, 5
20. A View to a Kill, 4
21. Diamonds Are Forever, 4
22. Moonraker, 3
23. Live and Let Die, 2
24. Die Another Day, 1
I’ve always said that watching a Bond film is like catching up with an old friend. I love them utterly. Even the ones I’ve bitched about when reviewing them.
And as a bonus ranking of the Bond actors -
Connery…
...Craig
Both have aspects of the literary Bond; Connery the cool professional; Craig the taciturn mask. Yet both imbued the role with their own masculine swagger. And both have this undeniable presence, that makes it difficult for you to look away.
Sir Roger Moore
Urbanely haughty, irresistibility charming. Sir Rog had the uncanny ability to either make you laugh - with the film not at it mind you - or be so deadly serious, that you forget how good an actor he was. Sean Connery is undoubtedly the best of the Bonds, but my favourite is Sir Rog. He was a white knight. Yet in this ever-changing world in which we live in, Moore’s Bond vanquished the monster and saved the girl. Simplistic, maybe. But hopeful too.
Dalton/Brosnan
One has the star power of a substitute geography teacher. One has the acting range of, well, a substitute geography teacher. Both great in their own right, but something was missing.
Lazenby
Well, someone had to be last. But at the heart of it, Lazenby had the stones to go up to EoN’s production office and blag his way to the most coveted role there is. Bravo.
Hope you’ve enjoyed the show. Goodnight.
*Disclaimer -
I’ve been having a gander at Joseph Darlington’s YouTube channel, in which he reviews the Bond movies. He’s got a good method of reviewing them, which I’m going to shamelessly steal. He rates his least favourite as 1 out of 10, his favourite as a ten, and the rest fits in between, kind of like grading on a curve. The Bond films are a genre unto themselves, and I shall be ranking them as their own little genre. Naturally, if I was rating them against other films, they would be high on the 1 – 10 scale. But, for this little game, I’m going to do something rather different.
You nailed each Bond in a nutshell.
I'm not totally sure how to organize these. I figure since I haven't done one in a long time, I can afford to be a bit long winded, and maybe break them down by category as I go.
For Your Eyes Only (1981)
The film itself has grown a lot in my estimation in more recent years, with its greatest leap coming when I was lucky enough to catch it in the cinema after the passing of Roger Moore. I think it benefitted a lot, as well, on this week's viewing, from being the first Bond film I've seen in quite some time (and with it coming during a particularly stressful time what with this virus and all of that).
I really loved it. What I once dismissed as tonal inconsistences I now see as Moore's Bond being fairly seamlessly woven into Fleming's. There is a lot of Fleming here, in terms of tone and plot (elements from other Fleming works) and character. I don't dislike any of the 5 John Glen directed Bond films, but they're mostly all very workmanlike from a stylistic standpoint and this is no different. I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing, particularly given the subject matter and general tone of the film. Moore's performance here is fantastic, as he has to somehow balance the more Fleming moments while still embodying the "Superman" Bond that he had come to be understood as due to the previous couple of entries. I think it's often underappreciated how difficult that likely is to pull off as an actor - to render both of those elements believable within the same character/film.
The action sequences are some of the best in the series, no doubt. Full stop. Incredibly well staged and cleanly and clearly executed. The ebb and flow of something like the ski sequence - from the time Bond finds himself cornered by Kriegler until he finally gets away - is just incredible as a piece of action filmmaking.
On top of that, the plot works. The supporting cast is honestly fantastic. I have come to appreciate Julian Glover's Kristatos a bit more than I once did, although he certainly doesn't have that memorable flair that many of the other villains in the Moore era (and the series as a whole) have. Columbo is one of the series' best allies, and what I once regarded as poor acting from Carole Bouquet (and, frankly, it may be poor acting) I now see as cold, emotionless response to witnessing the murder of her parents. It is as if witnessing that has rendered something inside her inoperable. I think it works. And those eyes, man, those eyes.
There is so, so much more I could write about this film (and all of them) but I'm pretty out of practice. Maybe I'll get some better thoughts down in a Google Doc and post them up at a later time. For now: really enjoyed revisiting FYEO to kick off my 2020 Bondathon.
Once I've seen my second one I'll throw up the rankings here. I guess I did see (most) of Spectre recently with my partner, so I could probably add that to get the list going. I'll add more categories as I figure them out.
1. For Your Eyes Only
2. Spectre
Yes, it's done wonders for my anxiety disorder and just about every other aspect of my life, but at least it's given me some opportunity for some Bond comfort!
I mostly jest. But it is a stressful time. I'm still allowing myself to go out for a jog every now and then, to keep myself somewhat sane. I make sure to keep my distance, of course. Hope everyone else is doing well, amidst all of this!
Apologies for any sloppiness, I'm not putting too much thought into these / not editing myself too much for style / grammar.
The first half or so of this film is perhaps the best Bond film ever made. And this isn't to suggest that the latter half is weak, merely how incredible that first hour is. I think there's a reason this is considered the quintessential Bond film. When I was a kid, and I first saw Goldfinger on VHS, I wasn't aware of its reputation, and yet I still *felt* it. It is indelible. The Hamilton factor, if you will. It's with Hamilton's direction (and many other factors, to be sure) that you see the movie lean away from the Fleming feel that Young's first two had, and more into pure blockbuster territory. Goldfinger is aiming to please. It feels as though it is aiming to be iconic, like it knew how special it would be even at the time.
Connery, of course, is incredible, even as he leans more into the charm and animal magnetism and away from some of the lethal, harder edge that he brought under Young's direction. The glimmer in his eye. The subtle facial expression shifts. The immense charisma. His performance carries the second half of the film -- which sees Bond largely impotent and thwarted at every turn, something that, while not uncommon in the series, is pretty atypical given the extent to which it occurs here. This brings me to Goldfinger himself, whom I've always considered one of the series' better villains but I was struck this time at just how good he is. Not only is Frobe's interplay with Bond incredible to watch, but the character is one of the most threatening and cunning in the Bond canon, all under the guise of a sort of jovial business-like greed. While the first hour shows Bond outwitting Goldfinger multiple times, the second half of the film sees Goldfinger repeatedly thwarting Bond's efforts and attempts to get word out / save the day.
Indeed, one of the few issues I have with the film (while also ironically being one of the things I admire it for due to its uniqueness) is Bond's relative impotence within the movement of the plot and story. It is compelling to watch Bond, clever though he is, try and fail multiple times, but the way in which he is sidelined (not in screentime, but in his influence on the plot) does deflate things just slightly.
There is much else to love, fortunately. The suits. Moore's cinematography and Hamilton's lively/warm direction infuses just enough danger and menace and stakes into the otherwise purely-fun focused tone (much of this thanks to Frobe). Connery has loads of chemistry with all of the women in the film (the rape scene, while very difficult to watch, does at least make sense within the four walls of the film, if 40,000 lives were at stake, and Bond is desperate -- it also appropriately complicates the character, lest we forget that 007 is not of the highest quality of integrity and such). That said, he and Blackman are wonderful together in the scenes they share. Ken Adams' production design, while modest compared to the work he would do later on in the series, is breathtaking to this day.
All in all, I'm always going to consider Goldfinger one of the best films in the series. I could write at length about various scenes, the way Hamilton stages them, Connery's interplay with the rest of the cast, the fantastic action set piece at the center of the film, Barry's score. Eminently watchable.
1. Goldfinger
2. For Your Eyes Only
3. Spectre
Thanks!
Watched this for my good friend's birthday and we gave eachother a call and talked about it afterward. Dalton is, as he calls it, "his Bond." As you can see, I haven't been giving too much thought to the order of this Bondathon, kind of just winging it. Anyway.
I think I've made my quibbles with the movie pretty clear around these boards here and there, but I'll compile them all in one place:
- Despite his strong work on TLD, Alec Mills' cinematography here is toward the bottom of the series. Perhaps it is my untrained eye, and the film's poor aesthetic is more due to production designing than Mills, but it seems to me to be quite over lit most of the time, leading it to look like a syndicated cop show moreso than a Bond film, which for a series that has prided itself on its style is a pretty hefty shortcoming. This is my only major complaint with the film. Which leads me to...
- This is a little too American for my tastes in Bond (despite being an American myself). It all looks a bit cheap, and frequently feels dangerously close to veering into "generic 80s action romp" territory. This is a more minor quibble, because I think the movie is mostly successful at what its aiming for, but I'm still a little bothered by it nonetheless.
- Dalton's hair in that casino scene! My god!
- Some of the more brutal violence is a little off-color for the series, I think. That said, I don't really have a problem with it. Again, it fits the 80s action tone they were going for, so I'll do my best to approach this one (and all of the films) on their own terms rather than force them to meet my expectations/biases.
- Kamen's score, while inoffensive and palatable, is just that. It is fairly pedestrian and uninspired.
Now... onto the strengths of the movie.
- Dalton is fantastic in the role, once again. He has this softer humanity, softer than any of the other Bond actors, that he renders believable inside this wild beast ready to get out. You really feel the emotional thrust of the film as Bond goes out on his quest for vengeance.
- The revenge angle, while not something I'd want for all Bond films, really works quite well here, and allows it to slightly riff on some of the formula / freshen things up a bit.
- Pam Bouvier is a pretty strong Bond girl, I think.
- The action is spectacular, particularly the famed tank chase at the end.
- All of the sequences of Bond sneaking around are a real treat. I always want more of that in the series and this film certainly delivers.
- I LOVE the supporting cast in this film, in general. Sanchez, Dario, Sharky, Professor Joe Butcher (especially), even Felix and Della who are forced to make a strong impression in the really early goings.
I could think of more, certainly, and I know I wrote more about the "negatives" than I did the positives, but I simply feel a little more responsible to provide some explanation and rationale whenever I criticize something, give it a fair shake and what not.
I also don't want it to be confused -- I really like the movie. There are very few Bond films that I'd even come close to saying I "dislike." This isn't one of them, although I don't hold it in as high a regard as some, it has some really great things going for it. I could certainly write more. I apologize this "review" wasn't more academic. Pretty dodgy. All in all, I'm still pretty baffled when people say they prefer this to TLD, but hey, that's what makes this fandom fun. It certainly has a stronger villain.
Updated rankings:
1. Goldfinger
2. For Your Eyes Only
3. Licence to Kill
4. Spectre
Watched this after recently discussing it with a fairly ardent defender of it, so I figured out of respect I would give the movie the benefit of the doubt and watch it while that discussion was still fresh in my mind.
I recently started a blog during this quarantine lockdown to keep myself sane, so I won't write as much here today. Perhaps I'll post a link to the blog (if that's allowed?) once I have a few more fleshed out posts written. It's nothing academic, a mix of personal anecdotes and feelings with some genuine film criticism trickled in. But mostly low stakes and casual.
As for the film, I liked it a bit more than my previous two viewings in the last 5-6 years or so, so I guess that's a plus? Most of my quibbles with it remain: it has a lot of ambition, but it is ambition that the filmmakers weren't, well, ambitious enough to follow through with, so instead we get a mix of artistic pretensions alongside a "Bond as usual" bag of really watered down and weak tropes (Brosnan can't do Moore as well as Moore, and he can't do Connery or Dalton nearly as well as those actors either, and the film asks him to shift back and forth almost constantly). Lots of whiplash when it comes to tone, emotional and thematic scope, and so on.
I've said this a million times, here and elsewhere, but there is a great Bond film lurking somewhere in TWINE, which makes it all the more disappointing. If my "ambition" sentence doesn't make a lot of sense I'll elaborate a bit here. The film labors to bring a level of complexity to Brosnan's Bond that we haven't seen too much of yet (they flirt with it in GE to varying degrees of success) and to a degree that the series in general hasn't seen since... OHMSS probably? The problem is, it's a Purvis and Wade script. So we've got ambitious scope, especially in regards to Elektra (who is great, I maintain, in practice nearly as much as on paper) but then we've got all of the eye-rolling trappings of a Brosnan Bond.
I'm a Brosnan apologist. I think any flaws of his period are rarely attributable to him, and I generally like his films more than most (I rate GE very highly, TND middling, DAD higher than most would put it, for example) but TWINE is a spineless movie when it comes down to it. It wants to be OHMSS, but it throws in pedestrian action scenes to meet the explosion-per-reel quota to keep the kiddies from nodding off. It isn't confident in its own ambitions, so it constantly cuts itself off at the knees, which prevents it from really digging into any of the emotional complexity that it so clearly wants to explore. The result, then, is that it fails on both levels. I'll write more in the blog, hopefully this made sense.
The action scenes, aside from the boat chase in the PTS, are mostly shoehorned in (I know many Bond action scenes are, but they feel particularly obligatory here) and they are uninspired. Even the things we haven't seen before (the Caviar Factory set piece) still feels like "been there, done that." Apted's bipolar direction of Brosnan means it is probably his worst performance. Denise Richards is every bit as bad as people say she is, and the weird defenses I've read of her are hilarious.
I'm going to listen to Arnold's score sometime soon, and I'll leave my thoughts when I've listened. I'm an Arnold fan/apologist as well, and I think much of his Barry pastiche is just fine, but he certainly borders on obnoxious at times.
Elektra is great. Marceau is great with the material she's given. It's just that there is SO MUCH that could be done with what is honestly a very unique Bond film on paper, and in execution SO much of it is squandered. Also, the film ENDS after the killing of Elektra. That is the climax. And while I don't hate the submarine stuff quite as much as I used to (Bond holding his breath sequence is some good ole fashioned spy business and it's really intense), it still feels tacked on. I paused it today after he shoots Elektra and the film still has like nearly twenty minutes left. Yawn.
Wow, I've written a lot. I'll write more about what I enjoy / what I think works in my full review/overview on the film on the blog. Not sure if links are allowed. Also, I need to revisit SP sometime soon, but as of now this has passed it, because as boring as TWINE occasionally is, it isn't as ambitious/pretentious nor as boring as SP frequently is. They're very similar, and no matter which way you cut it I think they're both low-low-tier in the canon.
1. Goldfinger
2. For Your Eyes Only
3. Licence to Kill
4. The World Is Not Enough
5. Spectre
Swap FYEO and LTK, and I'll agree with you. Good job @ThighsOfXenia!
Where Majesty’s final act, is arguably the best of the entire franchise, SP delivers onto us a series of plopping farts.
as essential reading on how to perfectly convey a view point without getting too dry and scholarly.
In other words, i wish I'd thought of that line. ;)
Nah. Swap LTK with GF more like it ;)
@Birdleson I know we have a few disagreements here and there when it comes to ranking, but so far it seems like great minds think alike! I'm going back through Arnold's score now the day after. What do you think of it / Arnold in general? I'm not sure if we've ever had this discussion.
I don't know if its the despair that is generally plaguing the world these days, but it was nice to find a bit more than usual to appreciate about TWINE, even if I'd still slot it near or at the bottom. I think in general, despite being more and more of a cinephile you'd think I'd be more critical, I'm seeing more to appreciate about films in the series. I've stopped (to the best of my abilities) bringing preconceived notions and expectations and placing them on the films, rather I attempt to see them for what they are and evaluate them on how well they succeed at what they're going for. And, at the end of the day, positivity will always be more fun than negativity.