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
This is an absurd argument. A great movie but a poor Bond film? Total nonsense.
It is neither of these. It's a decent Bond movie. Slightly overrated around hear IMO but neither a great movie nor a poor Bond film. Somewhere happily in the middle.
I prefer Thunderball over Goldfinger.
The first three Connery films are better than the second three, but with the exception of DAF their quality is evident, even as mere spectacles. The Brosnan films by contrast are postmodern pastiches of Bond films larded with American action film cliches, and their "quality" is only evident to those who had the misfortune to grow up on them and consequently afflicted by nostalgia.
As for Thunderball over Goldfinger, I can see that if the pacing in TB wasn't so bad. Honestly GF is quite flawed and isn't anywhere near as great as the hype train would lead you to believe it is. I think Dr. No, DAF and of course FRWL are miles better than Goldfinger honestly.
It's not necessary to keep affirming your honesty--no one doubts the sincerity of your opinions, just their wisdom. Most people have a soft spot for the Bond movies they grew up with, and if you were a couple decades older you'd mostly likely be a partisan of Roger instead.
Probably because very people would agree with you about the Craig films being lousy. On the contrary, the Craig era has tended to make the Brosnan era look retrospectively worse in the eyes of many people, as can be seen on any Bond message board.
There isn't a hype train. There's just the fact that GF was an immense success with the public and permanently put the series on the map of the global consciousness, providing a template the series continues to work from and embedding itself into pop culture. That's why even Brosnan drove an Aston Martin in his films. Those who knock GF would do better to try understanding why it had such a seismic impact. If it doesn't seem fresh to you today, it's because almost every succeeding Bond film has tried replicating its ingredients.
My only true issue probably his Bond girls they lacked that Bond girl poise and sophistication and it’s all because they weren’t Europeans.
Craig got better looking Bond girls because they were exotic European women.
Brosnan sadly got generic American beauties.
I think the only case where the American is more exotic and spectacular is
no time to die definitely Ana de Armas is much more beautiful and stunning than Lea Seydux.
But yes at the end all the problems with Christmas Jones was Denis Richards portraying her I watched a video review on the world is not enough and the guy kept repeating that the film would have been better if the cigar lady from the pre titles sequence would have portrayed Christmas.
The name was a little homage to the Moore era or something classic bond like pussy galore or plenty otoole. Everyone’s problem is that the character was that it wasn’t an exotic European girl like Caterina Moorino or Berenice Marlhoe.
I too really like Brosnan's Bond, and love the first two of his Bond films, but what you say is factually incorrect, not to mention a big generalisation, and IMO not a fair one.
GE's Izabella Scorupco is Polish; Famke Janssen (I am including "bad" girls here for completeness' sake) is Dutch. Both are fun to watch.
TND's Teri Hatcher is American, but IMO she holds up well as a Bond girl looks-wise. Michelle Yeoh is Malaysian-Chinese, and she gave a first-rate performance.
TWINE's Sophie Marceau is as "exotic European" as it gets, though I'll grant you that Denise Richards looked and acted like a cookie-cutter cheerleader, completely out of place.
DAD's Halle Berry's character was poorly written and, yes, she is American, but Brit Rosamund Pike did not fare much better, also, IMO, due to poor writing.
I think that on balance, the only obviously miscast Brosnan-era Bond girl was Denise Richards.
And Ana De Armas is originally Cuban ;)
You can blame Rare
Sorry I enjoy Goldeneye but why does everyone put it in their top ten it seems … the bloody video game in fact I hadn’t heard a review NOT mention the game in a long time lol
I never played the game, and can give you my reasons.
Subjectively, it was fun to watch in a way that four out of five Craig films were not, for me. Just my impression.
- The plot never lagged, there was plenty of action but also enough cohesive story to make it all hang together.
- Brosnan as Bond in GE was certainly "lighter" than Dalton's LTK Bond, and slightly so than TLD's Bond, but he still had a serious edge that had been missing in Moore's Bond. He was sophisticated enough to pass as a playboy, but still believable as a killer.
- Sean Bean was superb as Trevelyan.
- This was Judi Dench's first outing as M, and she hit the ground running.
- Natalia was a believable Bond girl with a brain and a heart.
- Famke Janssen's Xenia was crazy fun.
- Boris Grishenko and Valentin Zhukovski were comical enough to be entertaining, but not over-the-top so to be annoying, and even nuanced enough not to be black-and-white "good" or "bad" guys.
- The stunts were very enjoyable. The PTS was a delight, and the tank sequence in St Petersburg was both hilarious and thrilling.
- Bond's final fight with Alec added a well-acted personal side to the climax.
It is not Oscar material, but I find it both re-watchable and still-entertaining on repeat viewings.True. I remember TWINE getting a FIVE STAR review in 'Total Film' magazine in 1999, saying Michael Apted has delivered a Bond classic @-)
It is NO coincidence that Brosnan's strongest screenplay was not written by Purvis & Wade...
Pierce himself said that he always tried to be both Connery + Moore, and it shows.
The films, by and large, seem to be put together so as not to offend anyone, yet truly please no one, all at the same time... they lack any edge, and feel like TV-movies, more than anything.
I do love GE's script, TND's PTS & score though, and will re-watch those two on occasion. Brosnan's 3rd and 4th however I have avoided and am all the better for it.
I didn't appreciate it as much at the time but looking back after the grandiose self-seriousness of the wildly-uneven (and IMO overall botched) Craig experiment, I miss that predictability.
I can agree, up to a point. And that point is 1997 :-/
I do agree that, despite DC bringing his A-game in all but SP and the films going higher in production quality than ever before, the grandiose self-indulgent 'experiment' as you aptly put it has turned out to be a botched job, by and large, certainly from a story and plot perspective.
They have been making it up as they go along... no clear vision, no consistent creative decisions.
1997 is the year I draw that line as well. Great posts guys 👍
I must admit, after seeing NTTD I had a strong urge to watch Goldeneye when I got home...
Perhaps I needed to cleanse my palate so to speak. I still have no idea where NTTD will figure in my rankings. I have only seen it the once and hopefully some repeat viewings on Bluray my view of it will become clearer.
Single malt drinker..? ;)
I did exactly that, for that very reason ;) ...then it turned into a mini-marathon of my favourites across all five Bonds ;)
Me too. GE, TND, then OHMSS, FRWL, GF, TB and TLD.
Almost the same, just longer. GE right away, then TND, OHMSS, LTK, SF, CR, DN, GF, TB, YOLT, TSWLM, NSNA (I know, I know), over the past two weeks. Could have thrown in FRWL and FYEO, but somehow they are still fresh in my memory. I've been saving TLD for dessert :P
I'm not sure about that actually. I'd say TWINE probably has the strongest, most interesting and surprising story of the lot of them - it just didn't turn out as a very good film.
If that had been one of the continuation novels everyone would be crying out for them to them to adapt it because it's so full of new ideas.
Yeah he's a proper film star in them: he's exactly what they needed and you laughed and got excited along with him. I did watch DAD again only a few weeks ago and I must say, in such close proximity to NTTD and Craig's amazing performance, Pierce's shortcomings do become very apparent, and it does all seem extremely thin throwaway stuff, but he's doing what's required of him regardless.
It is the broadly held view, which I also subscribe to, though the drop from GE to TND was not nearly as palpable as from TND to TWINE. That said, there is another thread floating around re: the first 30 minutes of DAD being good, and other than the surfing scene and the title song, I tend to agree. It has the makings of a good film until Bond gets to Cuba; then it disintegrates.