You Only Live Twice vs. Moonraker vs. Die Another Day

1235

Comments

  • Posts: 1,497
    Very intelligent posts by all.

    Although I think for the sake of reason we have to draw a line in the sand at people prepared to defend DAD. :)
    Dimi's right. If it wasn't for DAD, a movie so unbelievably terrible and shameful, we may not have had such a drastic re-boot.
    Sometimes you need to hit rock bottom before you can come back on top ;-)

    ...Seriously though, I admit I enjoyed the experience of DAD in the theatre at the time when it came out. It was my first Bond on the big screen--the gunbarrel, the PTS, Judi Dench (I've always enjoyed her performances--though now it's due time for a change), the 'color' of the film, it was explosive and over the top, even Brosnan--at the time he WAS Bond. Seeing what we've had since with DC in CR, makes DAD look abysmal in hindsight, but at the time, I was just excited to see a new Bond, and it wasn't that far of a diversion from TWINE and TND that came before. Sure, those films didn't come close to the early Connery films, but it was still exciting to have a new Bond film. It's about context. Brosnan looked and acted the part for Bond in DAD. So at least we have a convincing Bond despite all the other crap going on around him (mind the glacier surfing, etc). I think the same argument could be leant to MR.

    Nice posts above too Dimi and Haserot. I actually love the diversiy of opinion and the incredible depth of encyclopedic knowledge of all things Bond on this site. Also hearing praise for Bond films that aren't particulary my favorites (FYEO or GE for example), peaks my curiosity to revisit those films.

  • Posts: 1,778
    I keep hearing from everyone that DAD featured by far Brosnan's best performance. I need to know, were we watching the same movie? I saw a very by-the-numbers typical Brosnan performance that was no better or worse than his others. He posed and modeled his way through the movie in the same uninspired and cliche fashion he did in his other 3 films.
  • Posts: 4,762
    I agree with DoubleOhhSeven. I think Brosnan was pretty weak and uninteresting in Die Another Day. He was far better in his previous three, with his best being GoldenEye for sure.
  • LudsLuds MIA
    Posts: 1,986
    I keep hearing from everyone that DAD featured by far Brosnan's best performance. I need to know, were we watching the same movie? I saw a very by-the-numbers typical Brosnan performance that was no better or worse than his others. He posed and modeled his way through the movie in the same uninspired and cliche fashion he did in his other 3 films.
    As you may know, I'm probably the biggest naysayer when it comes to the travesty that is Die Another Day, and possibly for Brosnan as well. I personally consider DAD to be by far Brosnan's best performance, perhaps he is as you put it, DoubleOhhSeven, as bad as he always is, but in this case, DAD being so cringe-worthy and appalling, Brosnan may not be the worst thing about the flick...

  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited July 2011 Posts: 9,117
    Good lord I seem to have stumbled upon a hitherto undiscovered seam of DAD apologists.

    I agree with those who say Brozza puts in a pretty good performance (with the material given to him) and up until Jinx turns up its going quite well and theres no reason to think it will be any better or worse than TND or TWINE. The North Korea scenes are pretty good, the whole capture/torture thing is a novel idea. The ice driving scene has to be admired technically and I adore Arnolds trumpets as the cars speed out onto the ice.

    BUT

    Jinx is an absymal cardboard cutout of a character (far worse than Goodnight or Stacey), Zaos not far behind - dismal acting and a feeble threat to Bond. Nothing new needs to be said about the CGI abominations, Madonna or the laughable Mr Kil and to those of you offering a defence for the film can I just point out this fact that would make even a thousand pigeon double takes seem like the TSWLM parachute jump or the GE bungy jump: they put Bond in an invisible car!!!

    I'll say that again just in case in all your frenzy to heap praise on DAD you may have overlooked it - someone decided it would be a good idea to put James Bond in an invisible car.
    Even without anything else that would be enough to rank DAD rock bottom.

    Now say what you like about the pigeon, the elephant pushing JW into the canal or the Tarzan yell those moments come and go in a second and are entirely superfluous and it is possible to overlook them and not have them ruin the film. This monstrosity (which is such a disgrace I feel it tarnishes the Vanquish as a beautiful car) gets about 15 minutes of screen time and has several moments where it is integral to the plot. And before someone mentions the laser battle, I'll admit it is equally implausible but the mixture of the space shuttles being grounded in science fact and the brillaince of Derek Meddings work is enough for you to suspend your disbelief. I dont know anyone who greeted the invisible car in DAD with anything other than snorts of laughter and disgust.

    Despite Jinx the film was still steaming along at a reasonable rate of knots but the moment John Cleese's leg is visible through the car and people in the cinema next to you are laughing with derision you know that DAD is holed below the waterline and will go down with all hands.

    And I'm not buying all this 'its thanks to DAD that we got CR' that some people are peddling. Try going to a Japanese fisherman 'well the tsunami wiped out your entire family, town and livelihood but theyre going to build a brand new town so its turned out to be a blessing really.'

    I can enjoy quite a lot of DAD and go along with the ride a la YOLT and MR but I cannot forgive or ignore the travesties to the series that EON allowed to happen and no matter if they remake each Fleming novel faithfully as a period piece Babs and MGW can never remove this stain on their CV.

    Everyone is entitled to their opinion etc etc but use caution when you are praising DAD because there are some things about it that are indefensible. It crossed a line that YOLT and MR come close to but never actually step over and thats the fundamental difference.

    When people are listing the fact that it is colourful as being one of its strengths you know youre dealing with the runt of the litter. Well done Tamahori for managing to film it in black and white. Hilarious.


  • ...Seriously though, I admit I enjoyed the experience of DAD in the theatre at the time when it came out. It was my first Bond on the big screen--the gunbarrel, the PTS, Judi Dench (I've always enjoyed her performances--though now it's due time for a change), the 'color' of the film, it was explosive and over the top, even Brosnan--at the time he WAS Bond. Seeing what we've had since with DC in CR, makes DAD look abysmal in hindsight, but at the time, I was just excited to see a new Bond, and it wasn't that far of a diversion from TWINE and TND that came before.
    I must say that seeing DAD in the theatre was probably the closest I will get to feeling what it must have been like to see GF or TB during first release...

    Before everyone jumps down my throat I'm not comparing DAD with GF or TB in terms of quality. It's just that there was an air of excitement in the theatre that I've never experienced before. Although all Bonds films are to a degree "event films" there was something special in the air the opening night of DAD. The audience was on fire (there were a few guys in tuxedos and women in evening dresses - this wasn't an official premiere, they were just huge fans) and the atmosphere was positively electric. The audience enjoyed the film as much as any I'd ever seen and the sense of fun was incredible and enjoyable. In that way it was the "biggest" Bond film I've ever seen and an amazing experience.

    Sure, there were things that were bad and I'm sure the film doesn't hold up well, but what an experience for a Bond fan.
  • Posts: 1,778
    Im sorry I just don't see it. For me Brosnan sucked equally each time that unworthy man put on the tux. But atleast in the other films he was in better shape. Maybe it's just because Daniel Craig actually cared enough to workout and appear intimidated and has spoiled us in that regard. But I always chuckle when Brosnan is cooly walking down that street in havana with his pot belly hanging out.
  • edited July 2011 Posts: 11,189
    Im sorry I just don't see it. For me Brosnan sucked equally each time that unworthy man put on the tux.
    Ouch, you're talking about the man that first made me love Bond :-(

    I'll say that again just in case in all your frenzy to heap praise on DAD you may have overlooked it - someone decided it would be a good idea to put James Bond in an invisible car.
    Even without anything else that would be enough to rank DAD rock bottom.

    The invisable car isn't the low point of the film (or the series) IMO. It's pretty silly but I heard the technology was being played around with at the time - hence where the producers probably got the idea.

    It really is nothing compared to this:



    This is where the film looses any sense of reality or credibility. The ONLY redeeming feature of that clip is (perhaps) the music.
  • I am obviously in the minority but I will say this. I like DAD, have fun with MR and am bored to death by YOLT.
  • SharkShark Banned
    Posts: 348
    1. MR

    2. YOLT

    3. DAD
  • Im really suprised as to how many people agree with me and choose moonraker. I thought it was almost universally hated. Nice to see some love for Moonraker
  • PrinceKamalKhanPrinceKamalKhan Monsoon Palace, Udaipur
    Posts: 3,262
    Im really suprised as to how many people agree with me and choose moonraker. I thought it was almost universally hated. Nice to see some love for Moonraker
    Agreed. MR was the last 007 film to feature the contributions of Bernard Lee's M and Ken Adam's production design. It has a great lead performance from Moore, a beautiful and strong heroine in Miss Chiles, a terrific megavillain in Lonsdale and several beautiful locations. Also, another hauntingly beautiful score from master composer John Barry and the atmosphere of being only 1 decade removed from the golden 1960s Bond era.

    Can the mods add a poll to this please?

  • Im really suprised as to how many people agree with me and choose moonraker. I thought it was almost universally hated. Nice to see some love for Moonraker
    Agreed. MR was the last 007 film to feature the contributions of Bernard Lee's M and Ken Adam's production design. It has a great lead performance from Moore, a beautiful and strong heroine in Miss Chiles, a terrific megavillain in Lonsdale and several beautiful locations. Also, another hauntingly beautiful score from master composer John Barry and the atmosphere of being only 1 decade removed from the golden 1960s Bond era.

    Can the mods add a poll to this please?


    Good idea I will. Moonraker will always have a special place in my heart as it was the very first Bond film I ever saw. It doesn't deserve all the hate it's gotten.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 24,187
    Can the mods add a poll to this please?

    Done!

  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,718
    1. MR

    2. YOLT

    3. DAD
    Agreed.

  • PrinceKamalKhanPrinceKamalKhan Monsoon Palace, Udaipur
    Posts: 3,262
    Can the mods add a poll to this please?

    Done!

    Thanks, DD!
  • BennyBenny Shaken not stirredAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 15,138
    1. MR

    2. YOLT

    3. DAD
    Agreed.

    I also agree with this. MR is just an over the top adventure, that is pure fantasy. Much in the same mould as YOLT. A film that has grown on me in recent years. But maybe as I was a 70's child the film MR appeals to me a little more. Not much in it really between MR and YOLT.
    As for DAD it's still a hard film to watch, but I must confess to appreciating it the more I watch it. If I overlook all of the surfing, the invisible car, the plane on fire, Jinx, the dna stuff...it's not too bad. Again I put this down to age. Just didn't gel as a Bond film for me. To techno, poor effects, lack of any real stunts especially a Bond signature stunt. Every film has a stunt that makes you go wow. Well maybe not some of the early ones, but Bond is famous for his stunts. DAD was devoid of anything like this. Replaced with a pixelated stick man surfing ice waves. Oh dear.

  • edited August 2011 Posts: 2,107
    Well, I'm really two minds about MR and Twice. They're so similar films. Both hugely entertaining with big set pieces and investigative scenes and exotic locations. Japan is still very exotic place for me, as I've never been there. MR has a bunch of exotic places too. Though MR has a better villain and Moore in his prime. So, I think I have to choose that one. Other than that, it would be a tie.
  • edited August 2011 Posts: 1,497
    Im really suprised as to how many people agree with me and choose moonraker. I thought it was almost universally hated. Nice to see some love for Moonraker
    Agreed. MR was the last 007 film to feature the contributions of Bernard Lee's M and Ken Adam's production design. It has a great lead performance from Moore, a beautiful and strong heroine in Miss Chiles, a terrific megavillain in Lonsdale and several beautiful locations. Also, another hauntingly beautiful score from master composer John Barry and the atmosphere of being only 1 decade removed from the golden 1960s Bond era.
    This is exactly my problem with MR, Khan...it has all the right ingredients: Bernard Lee, Ken Adam and his incredible setwork, Roger Moore in his prime, Londsdale, the locations, Lewis Gilbert and of course John Barry and Shirley Bassey, but it doesn't add up to much. It's like they just threw all the ingredients into the pot and hoping to get magic. The plot becomes non-existent and inconsequential midway through the movie. Worst of all I feel like the movie is bigger than Bond--by contrast, in the Connery films, Bond always felt like the focal point; you always kept your eyes intently on him to what he would say, how he would move, how he would get out of situations. In MR, Bond feels like background to all the colorful things happening around him in the film: Drax, the locations, the action, Jaws, the space battle. Sure it's Moore as Bond with all the usual quips, but he has to compete too much with all the other elements that he almost feels like a nameless face running around in a video game.

    Ok...that's enough--before I get too carried away it will sound like I don't like MR; which I do. It's just that it doesn't work as well as others for me

    :-S
  • edited August 2011 Posts: 19,339
    IGNORE DOUBLE POST
  • Posts: 7,653
    Moonraker - sheer brilliance

    YOLT - Connery on form, too bad the story left the Fleming tale somewhere behind

    DAD - Brosnan in his best 007 performance, too bad that CGI and loud noises where considered a great ending. Poor decesionmaking on the part of EON.
  • Posts: 19,339
    1) YOLT
    2) MR
    3) DAD
  • edited August 2011 Posts: 1,778
    MR and YOLT are neck-and-neck in the polls. But I haven't voted yet.
  • LudsLuds MIA
    Posts: 1,986
    LOL @ vote for DAD ;)
  • Posts: 102
    I don't get the hatred for DAD. it's very good fun.

    DAD
    YOLT
    MR
  • Posts: 1,386
    YOLT > MR > DAD

    Those first two are a close call for me. Donald pleasance elevates YOLT for me. MR has my favorite Roger Moore PTS and I have to say that Michael Lonsdale as Hugo Drax has really grown on me over the years. YOLT and MR are both a lot of fun IMO but I really do prefer Connery as Bond even on a subpar day so I have to go with YOLT. YOLT and MR set out to be pure comic book-style adventures & succeed immensely at being just that IMO. DAD frustrates me because I feel like it can't make up its mind whether it wants to be gritty or outlandish and consequently I don't know how I should be viewing it--whether I should pay close attention to the plot or whether I should kick back, relax, & suspend disbelief so when things get really out there plotwise I am super focused on the plot and expecting something in the realm of the more plausible. In my opinion neither YOLT or MR have this problem.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited February 2016 Posts: 23,883
    MR>=YOLT>DAD

    I like the polish of MR. Superb special effects and great humour. Drax is an interesting villain, and I also like the space bit at the end (I may be the only one I realize). My only complaints are the ridiculous way all action sequences are spoiled by some stupid gadget, so that all the tension is taken out of the film. It's played too much for laughs.

    I really enjoy YOLT up to Aki's death. Then it tanks for me. It's close between MR/YOLT for me as a result (YOLT>MR for the first half and MR>YOLT for the second half).

    DAD is just too overblown with less interesting characters. I enjoy it, but YOLT/MR are much better imho.
  • edited February 2016 Posts: 1,596
    MR = YOLT (more or less, might prefer MR ever so slightly) and then both of them > DAD.

    @bondjames, I can see why it tanks there for you, but you can't appreciate Young's cinematography or Adams' legendary set?

    I love MR and probably rank it much higher than all but a small handful on these boards. I'm sure I've said several times why. Just pure escapist spectacle. Gorgeous movie, and the humor mostly works for me. Sure, there is ZERO Fleming here, but I don't require the Fleming quotient for a Bond movie to "click" for me.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited February 2016 Posts: 23,883
    @ThighsOfXenia, I definitely do appreciate the cinematography and Adam's set in YOLT. No doubt they're great. It's just that I much preferred the earlier part of the film, when Bond arrives in Japan and sort of explores it on his own. It's quite exotic and interesting, similar to Bond's explorations in the earlier half of TMWTGG. Its just when Connery gets into disguise that I lose a lot of interest in the film.

    It's very close between MR/YOLT for me. MR just wins it because I much prefer the MR space set and the altercations that take place there over the YOLT finale.
  • edited February 2016 Posts: 1,596
    @bondjames Yeah I understand. I think I prefer MR too slightly. The film definitely loses momentum with that training/disguise/marriage seqence that could have been cut in half and the movie wouldn't have lost a thing.
Sign In or Register to comment.