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
Just to remind everyone..
Actually that sounds really good. Lazenby would've been great in some of the fight scenes, we could've actually got some decent martial arts fights in there.
Replace Nic Nac with a henchman played by Bruce Lee? God this sounds brilliant.
QoS is great Bond film. Craig is awesome in it but Dalton Bond would have fitted in well.
Thats because QOS is basically a watered down remake of LTK only with the eurotrash villians instead of a Drug lord
LTK is actually a good film for one thing :P
Seriously though they're nothing like eachother. It felt like they were sort of going for a LTK style revenge approach but the tacked on water subplot ruined that.
Pierce Bronsan was 35. He was old enough to play Bond. But at the end of the day, it all turned out the way it was suppose to be.
QOS has some nice moments (the opera scenes) but overall I think it's a mess. It should've had a straight forward story about Bond tracking down Yusef and Quantum but instead we got a tacked on water plot which frankly didn't intrest me.
Some scenes are well directed but the editing ruins the action scenes. It seems like they tried to copy Bourne but failed. And there's too much action for the run time, it takes over the film.
And the villian and henchman are imo, crap.
LTK has a straight forward but good revenge story, well edited action with some of the best stunts in the series, it was different but still had all the classic Bond elements (gadgets, etc), a threatening villian with a cool henchman, and more.
The only thing I think QOS does better than LTK are the locations.
Qos kicks LTK ass. Craig on a one man reveange mission seems more real then Dalton's for me anyway
It SHOULD have been a revenge mission but like I said, I think they over complicated things.
I think I gave good reasons in my other post for why I think LTK is a much better film than QOS. I'd like to know why you think QOS is so much better.
http://www.mi6community.com/index.php?p=/discussion/1950/switch-the-bond-actors-to-different-films/p1
QOS is no more real than LTK. In fact, in real life, Quantum would have taken care of Bond quickly as he leaves his mark all over the place. Green knows who Bond really is and fails to kill him at the party just before Matthis dies.
Fails to kill a man who is a huge liability as in exposing the operation? Green suddenly loses his ruthless streak despite showing at the opera how ruthless he can be as well as earlier?
This is after Bond wreaked havoc at the opera. Very realistic? Not!
I am not saying QOS is a bad film, but for a $200 million price tag to get it made, it could have been significantly better. The writer's strike does not explain everything as Bond films occasionally screw up even with no strike.
In LTK, Bond infiltrates Sanchez's organisation and gets the villain to do some of the killing for him. Which is smart if you are just one man. It is only towards the end that Dario blows Bond's cover.
In QOS Bond is a bit idiotically gung ho and seems to forgotten that he is going up against people that almost cost him his private parts not too long ago.
His gung ho attitude makes little sense in an age where everything you do get's recorded. Sure he should be tough but a little smarter considering his expert training.
I think Sanchez to me is one of the greatest Bond villains ever. He has not dated psychologically and you really get a sense of his sadism.
I assumed it was because they almost cost him his privates that he was so gung ho. I know I would be! :-))
WITH GUY HAMILTON DIRECTING YOU GOT IT .....THIS GUY IS THE SMARTEST DUDE ON HERE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Dalton only has the Dracula hair in the casino scenes. I mean, fair enough. And Dracula is a cool look anyway.
I mean Craig's "Hello sailor!" hair style in SF, especially in the bar scenes where he is getting drunk during his MI6 post-shooting absence. That to me did not look good and I have no idea why they gave him a crew cut. It looks a bit too YMCA butch for me. :)
I mean Connery had shorter hair but it makes his hair look long comparitavely.
But it did not spoil my enjoyment of the film is the point I am making.
That is true. Davi's Sanchez is the best aspect of the film. His performance is chilling.
I think he is brilliant. He was scary. Like when he watches Milton Crest in the decompression chamber. Sanchez will be like Scarface and that is timeless.
Dalton's Bond was perfect for this type of villain. The two have similarities as men and the sub-text of LTK shows how they could easily be best of friends had he not hurt Felix.
Very perverse.
But then you would have one less Connery film? :)
DAF was an unfortunate Connery film so I wouldn't mind missing it.
This is amazing. But I love him in DAF. He was so funny and still super cool. This is just me.
He was great but the film was just too camp to be taken seriously. It's his Moonraker...
It was camp. I give Guy Hamilton credit that he was to me the best Bond director in doing the campier stuff. But DAF is a great comedy and I can forgive it because it knows you are laughing all the way.
I disliked the campness in TSWLM as well as Moonraker.