Controversial opinions about Bond films

1287288290292293707

Comments

  • Posts: 19,339
    Well,i agreed and pointed out where I differ..
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 4,023
    Oy, why'd I even bother to write a thing.

    Well this is a discussion forum, or would you rather people only wrote things you agree with...?


    ;)

    I just expect a higher standard of criticism. If we're really going to argue, let's do it, but if picking on Dalton for a silly hair cut is all that's on the table, what's the point?

    I posted my tally for me, because I thought it was interesting and fun, and all it invited was people implying that anyone that agreed was full of shit and then relegated further into a juvenile thrashing of Dalton for how he looked. I just expect more hard-thought academia than the kinds of comments you hear around the playground at a preschool.

    Just a bit of humour, but his hair in LTK has come in for some criticism before. I mean come on, it looks ridiculous in the casino scenes! When I first saw the film I thought "What the hell were they thinking?!!"

    My other criticisms of the film were all relevant and right in my opinion.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    edited March 2017 Posts: 28,694
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Well,i agreed and pointed out where I differ..

    You never disappoint in these matters, @barryt007, so you needn't worry; I wasn't speaking of you. It's just that sometimes the way people respond to others' points, it's like you killed their mother, brought her back from the dead, slapped her, then killed her again. I certainly hope I don't act in such a way when I argue a point. If I do at any time, I need to rethink how I present my opinions to avoid becoming a person I don't respect.
  • Posts: 19,339
    barryt007 wrote: »
    Well,i agreed and pointed out where I differ..

    You never disappoint in these matters, @barryt007, so you needn't worry; I wasn't speaking of you. It's just that sometimes the way people respond to others' points, it's like you killed their mother, brought her back from the dead, slapped her, then killed her again. I certainly hope I don't act in such a way when I argue a point. If I do at any time, I need to rethink how I present my opinions to avoid becoming a person I don't respect.

    Thanks pal !

  • edited March 2017 Posts: 11,189
    i admit i do find Dalton a bit mannered at times in LTK and I'm more inclined to agree with LeonardPine about the Della scene. It feels like he IS acting with a capital A.

    That's not to say he doesn't have some effective moments in the film (his response to Della outside the house as he leaves is great) but I can't help but think of him as more one-note overall too. The "rage" Dalton is trying to convey feels forced.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited March 2017 Posts: 23,883
    @0BradyM0Bondfanatic7, I agree that Dalton's Bond wasn't presented in a cohesive manner. There is indeed a dichotomy between his intentionally more serious and determined portrayal and the remnants of Moore's philandering. It's jarring.

    Whether that's down to the scriptwriters or Dalton himself, I'm not sure. I suspect it's both, because I've never found Dalton convincing as a lover (he's just too serious a chap). Even Laz did a better job with it (although even he wasn't a patch on Connery/Moore).

    I think they could have done without the casual sex (and mention of Bond as a serial lover) in TLD/LTK, as long as they incorporated more of the throwaway wit, because that's what contemporary heroes like Arnie, Bruce and Mel were doing at the time. Unfortunately, Dalton couldn't do that convincingly either, at least imho.

    Ironically, Moore's FYEO had a far less sex driven Bond than either of Dalton's efforts.

    I feel the same way about Craig too by the way. This is why his encounters with Severine and Lucia ring hollow to me and conversely his behaviour in QoS (and even in CR when he dumps Solange for the mission) is more believable. Having said that, the film makers smartly ensured that in both cases (SF & SP), it drove the narrative forward and that's why it still works.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    edited March 2017 Posts: 4,023
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    i admit i do find Dalton a bit mannered at times in LTK and I'm more inclined to agree with LeonardPine about the Della scene. It feels like he IS acting with a capital A.

    That's not to say he doesn't have some effective moments in the film (his response to Della outside the house as he leaves is great) but I can't help but think of him as more one-note overall too. The "rage" Dalton is trying to convey feels forced.

    Thanks @BAIN123

    The Pushkin interrogation scene in TLD where Dalton is absolutely venomous and nails it from beginning to end shows just how good Dalton could play as Bond.

    Which is why it was so puzzling to me why he seemed to be overplaying everything to the point where it seemed fake in LTK. He had a couple of nice moments in LTK but he was awesome all the way through TLD.

    No comparison in my opinion.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited March 2017 Posts: 23,883
    I prefer Dalton in LTK personally, overacting and all. He's more credible & internally authentic in his portrayal. However, he's also less stylish and 'cool', and I don't like that element (because I like my Bond cool and unflappable).
  • Posts: 19,339
    bondjames wrote: »
    I prefer Dalton in LTK personally, overacting and all. He's more credible & internally authentic in his portrayal. However, he's also less stylish and 'cool', and I don't like that element (because I like my Bond cool and unflappable).

    Agreed.

  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    bondjames wrote: »
    @0BradyM0Bondfanatic7, I agree that Dalton's Bond wasn't presented in a cohesive manner. There is indeed a dichotomy between his intentionally more serious and determined portrayal and the remnants of Moore's philandering. It's jarring.

    Whether that's down to the scriptwriters or Dalton himself, I'm not sure. I suspect it's both, because I've never found Dalton convincing as a lover (he's just too serious a chap). Even Laz did a better job with it (although even he wasn't a patch on Connery/Moore).

    I think they could have done without the casual sex (and mention of Bond as a serial lover) in TLD/LTK, as long as they incorporated more of the throwaway wit, because that's what contemporary heroes like Arnie, Bruce and Mel were doing at the time. Unfortunately, Dalton couldn't do that convincingly either, at least imho.

    Ironically, Moore's FYEO had a far less sex driven Bond than either of Dalton's efforts.

    I feel the same way about Craig too by the way. This is why his encounters with Severine and Lucia ring hollow to me and conversely his behaviour in QoS (and even in CR when he dumps Solange for the mission) is more believable. Having said that, the film makers smartly ensured that in both cases (SF & SP), it drove the narrative forward and that's why it still works.

    I think there were a lot of factors there regarding Bond's sexual appetite. For one, AIDS had an impact at the time and I've heard that the knee-jerk reaction was not to show Bond sleeping with everything with two legs anymore, instead focusing the script on him romancing one woman who we never actually see him get intimate with.

    As for the tone, as much as I'm saddened that the scripts still had Moore's style of quip at times, I can't blame EON for going that way. They were coming off of a long run of films with a distinct style, and had to go all in with a new Bond that was untested in the public eye. It's understandable that they'd include the lighter stuff from Moore's era as insurance in case people didn't take to Dalton's different approach, at least making the audiences feel like enough of old Bond was still there for them to enjoy. It was a self-preservation move.

    As for Moore's Bond having less of a sexual appetite in FYEO than Dalton's Bond did, that's pretty easy to say when he was at least double the age of all the women around him! Bond could either indulge in women young enough to be his daughters or face statutory rape charges, and I think we both know what choice he had to make. ;)
    bondjames wrote: »
    I prefer Dalton in LTK personally, overacting and all. He's more credible & internally authentic in his portrayal. However, he's also less stylish and 'cool', and I don't like that element (because I like my Bond cool and unflappable).

    Agreed. Dalton is just a bigger, more interesting draw to me in LTK. He's probably the least "stylish" Bond, always dressing in suits that look off the rack from the field, but that grounds him in my eyes a bit and makes him feel more real. The lack of glamor to his movies also helps to underscore their return to the spy-thrillers that Bond used to be when Tim was a wee lad, where Bond gets bloodied and messy in everything he wears while thirsting for retaliation.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    For me the glamour is something that always needs to be there. The further you pull back from that you move into Le Carre territory. He created Smiley because Bond was a big dollop of nonsense. The trappings of expensive living and the stylish flourishes are some of the key idiosyncrasies of Bond and set him apart from the contenders. That's not to say you can't do an LTK, I just think they benefit when there's a level of gloss to it. When you look at GF, or OHMSS, or CR there's a richness to them that you don't find in LTK, but it's something you could have without sacrificing the tone of that movie.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited March 2017 Posts: 23,883
    As for Moore's Bond having less of a sexual appetite in FYEO than Dalton's Bond did, that's pretty easy to say when he was at least double the age of all the women around him! Bond could either indulge in women young enough to be his daughters or face statutory rape charges, and I think we both know what choice he had to make. ;)
    True, and that may have been why they went that route in FYEO. My point though is that it works in that film and is more internally consistent with the film's overall tone than the casual sex (actual or implied) sprinkled uncomfortably throughout TLD.
    RC7 wrote: »
    For me the glamour is something that always needs to be there. The further you pull back from that you move into Le Carre territory. He created Smiley because Bond was a big dollop of nonsense. The trappings of expensive living and the stylish flourishes are some of the key idiosyncrasies of Bond and set him apart from the contenders. That's not to say you can't do an LTK, I just think they benefit when there's a level of gloss to it. When you look at GF, or OHMSS, or CR there's a richness to them that you don't find in LTK, but it's something you could have without sacrificing the tone of that movie.
    Agreed. A bit more stylish polish would have done LTK good, and could have been injected without still losing the essence of what they were trying to convey there.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    I can understand the glamor and style comments/perspective. I love a good suit as much as anyone, but I guess what really matters to me above all is that Bond's character remains. What he's wearing doesn't value itself highly in comparison.

    Style and what Bond wears is important, though, as it tells us a lot about who he is. Sean's Bond is probably the best blueprint, as his clothes were nice without being overt or "loud" in style, made with the right fabrics for every climate he faced. The man made simple gray suits look like the coolest things ever. You could tell Bond liked looking presentable, but wasn't trying to catch eyes at New York fashion week; his own man. This ultimately fails because Sean is so handsome and magnetic, though. ;)

    Where I realized costume design can fail and make Bond seem not himself is with Roger and to some extent, Pierce. I think Roger's heavy use of double-breasted suits and cuts that ultimately make him look far too aristocratic really took away from his character, making his Bond feel like the upper crust type who'd scoff at civil service jobs like his own while munching on tons of caviar. In a different way, Pierce's suits are often killed by the use of those garish patterned ties, which Bond would never be caught dead in. I say this too often, but he looked like a used car salesman. My favorite suits of his, funnily enough, are those he wears open collar, like in the finale of TWINE and a small part of DAD. Pierce is the only Bond that actually feels more like Bond to me when he removes a tie! Funny, that.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited March 2017 Posts: 23,883
    Connery's clothing was definitely the most timeless, style wise imho. Second would be Laz. All the others seem more of the moment.

    I think they should get back to that early style. That doesn't mean going all fancy Kingsman though. Just ensure it's timeless and fits the purpose of the scene (whether that be watches, cars or suits). Nothing should stick out & be too obvious/overt.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,401
    RC7 wrote: »
    For me the glamour is something that always needs to be there. The further you pull back from that you move into Le Carre territory. He created Smiley because Bond was a big dollop of nonsense. The trappings of expensive living and the stylish flourishes are some of the key idiosyncrasies of Bond and set him apart from the contenders. That's not to say you can't do an LTK, I just think they benefit when there's a level of gloss to it. When you look at GF, or OHMSS, or CR there's a richness to them that you don't find in LTK, but it's something you could have without sacrificing the tone of that movie.

    yes.
  • Posts: 1,052
    RC7 wrote: »
    For me the glamour is something that always needs to be there. The further you pull back from that you move into Le Carre territory. He created Smiley because Bond was a big dollop of nonsense. The trappings of expensive living and the stylish flourishes are some of the key idiosyncrasies of Bond and set him apart from the contenders. That's not to say you can't do an LTK, I just think they benefit when there's a level of gloss to it. When you look at GF, or OHMSS, or CR there's a richness to them that you don't find in LTK, but it's something you could have without sacrificing the tone of that movie.

    yes.

    The Glamour is a bit part of Fleming's writing, it's actually a big part of who Bond is, he is very particular about what he wears, eats, drinks etc. Bond would not wear an off the peg suit.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    bondjames wrote: »
    Connery's clothing was definitely the most timeless, style wise imho. Second would be Laz. All the others seem more of the moment.

    I think they should get back to that early style. That doesn't mean going all fancy Kingsman though. Just ensure it's timeless and fits the purpose of the scene (whether that be watches, cars or suits). Nothing should stick out & be too obvious/overt.

    I don't know about George's suits. The one he wears cracking Gumbold's safe is good (a clear riff on Connery's default gray suits) and he looks good while at the college, but everything else signals the horrors of 70s style with the unsightly vibrant/mismatched colors and frills. The tuxedo is ruined, and the gold ensemble he wears in puke orange is another. Then there's whatever he has on for Draco's birthday. :-S

    Sean, George and Roger were all victims of their time's fashions. Sean had to wear the worst tux in Bond history in DAF in addition to some wacky suits that just didn't work at all (a suit with a turtleneck in the desert?!), and Roger suffered not only from the wrong kinds of suits, but also the wide lapels, bad colors and disproportionate tailoring of the day. In the 80s he looked better, just bland instead of outlandish. Dalton probably wears suits with the least amount of verve out of all 6, but he did get lucky enough to skip the horrible fashion periods all those before him suffered under. That was not a nice time for glamor and style in Bond!
  • edited March 2017 Posts: 11,189
    Dalton probably wears suits with the least amount of verve out of all 6, but he did get lucky enough to skip the horrible fashion periods all those before him suffered under.

    That's one thing I noticed about him. His tailoring doesn't seem as alluring to the camera compared to the others, who, even in poorer suits fashion-wise, had a cool aura about them. This could very well have been a deliberate choice but it does kind of reduce his presence/charisma.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited March 2017 Posts: 23,883
    I still contend that Connery, Moore and Laz looked best in whatever they wore. They had the kind of physique that could pull off anything and still look reasonably dapper and stylish (despite Moore's 70's indiscretions - only he could pull off the bell bottoms and the big collars while still looking stylish). Dalton and Brosnan didn't impress me. The former looked sloppy most of the time and the latter looked like he was trying too hard with the formal wear (again, too overt - the clothes wear him rather than the other way round).

    With Craig, one has to be careful due to his build. They got it right in QoS, but have severely blown it on the formal side since then in my view (casual is still great). Cruise looks far better in the last two MI films in my view, and that's not a good thing for Bond.
  • I like both of Dalton's films, but do think that LTK has a much more involved, emotional ending.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    I like both of Dalton's films, but do think that LTK has a much more involved, emotional ending.

    The winking fish made you cry.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 4,023
    I like both of Dalton's films, but do think that LTK has a much more involved, emotional ending.

    Yeah, especially the scene where Leiter is up for a bit of fishing a couple of days after his new wife was murdered...
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Something very fishy about LTK.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited March 2017 Posts: 23,883
    Something very fishy about LTK.
    Tell that to Felix. He disagreed with something that ate him. Same goes for Sharky.
  • Posts: 11,189
    whatever your opinion of LTK, you'd be hard pushed to not be impressed by the tanker climax, which still holds up brilliantly today. Watching it now.

    You can see the hard work that went into it.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,978
    LTK has a damn good finale, I've always enjoyed it. Then again, I don't necessarily have issues with the film that others do - some complaints I've heard, I can accept and agree with, but overall, I have fun every time I watch it.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,401
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    LTK has a damn good finale, I've always enjoyed it. Then again, I don't necessarily have issues with the film that others do - some complaints I've heard, I can accept and agree with, but overall, I have fun every time I watch it.

    Perhaps that's why the addendum at the end feels so unsatisfying.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited March 2017 Posts: 23,883
    It's a top 10 entry for me. Despite its stylistic flaws there's a lot to like.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,978
    @Mendes4Lyfe, it does feel like a bit of an odd wrap-up for certain characters, like the forced resolution of both girls being happy, so while Pam gets Bond in the end, Lupe drops her obsession with Bond and immediately is satisfied being with President Lopez. I do enjoy the fact that everyone comes back to party at the late Franz Sanchez's, though, and I enjoy watching Q gulp down that alcohol while looking fed up with Bond's antics.
  • edited March 2017 Posts: 11,189
    bondjames wrote: »
    It's a top 10 entry for me. Despite its stylistic flaws there's a lot to like.

    It's slightly outside my top 10 at present but I agree that there's quite a lot of strong points. Davi in particular is so good.

    There's a "tattiness" to the film though in a lot of places. That's difficult to ignore.
Sign In or Register to comment.