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
I agree that DN has more sex than many modern films. What exactly don't you buy, @DEKE_RIVERS?
DN offers three types of 'sexy' for Bond. 1) The recreational squeeze; 2) The enemy distraction; 3) The adventurous companion. All three were handled well, I think. My only regret is that we don't find out what happened to Honey between DN and FRWL. Then again, explaining former romances in every next film would've complicated things tremendously for the series.
Oh, I will easily choose DN over DAF or AVTAK any day, no contest.
I remember seeing AVTAK in the theater and thinking, "This is terrible and geriatric." And it is, but damn if I don't appreciate Walken and Jones, and Moore and Macnee, and even the score (which felt kind of poky at the time) a lot more now.
DAF is of course problematic with Wint and Kidd, and the degeneration of Tiffany into a bimbo. But it does have a sleazy charm, is funny, and the entire cast seems to be in on the joke. In a way, DAF is CR '67 done right.
DAD is indefensible, though. That film should never have existed.
I don't really like DAF; it's got some great lines, and Sean is back on the money, but it's not one I like hugely. But I must admit, although I can see AVTAK has its flaws, I just kind of love it. It's sort of my comfort Bond. So I'm afraid I would take it over DN, even though I can see DN has more merit and deserves its place in the pantheon of movie history more. 'View' just gives me more joy. I guess it comes down to the difference between 'best' and 'favourite'.
Are Wint and Kidd problematic? I'm not sure the film is saying gay people are evil per se. Agreed on Tiffany seeming to get less and less intelligent as the film goes on.
Agreed about AVTAK. A great example of its "comfort Bond" nature for me is when Bond jumps from the bridge onto the wedding cake.
Terrible: obvious stuntman, Moore looking particularly old, gawking bride extra. And yet...Barry's jazzy snippet of the title song and Jones' cackle. I. Love. It.
Best and Favorite don't even exist in the same universe. There is no criteria for what makes a film "favorite comfort food". That is solely up to personal preference based on a lifetime of experiences. No one can convince me that Disney's "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea" is not worthy of being my favorite film of all time.
LOL. I just realized that Moore bookended his run by destroying wedding cakes.
https://cultbox.co.uk/features/lists/times-james-bond-totally-ruined-someones-wedding
Ha! That's amazing, can't believe I never spotted that :D And both in boats too!
Anyway, this isn't a generational thing as such, but I have noticed with Bond (at least outside of these forums) that until recently there was a sort of unwritten rule that Connery was the best Bond, and the others were merely effective imitators (perhaps with the exception of Craig). To be honest I probably thought that myself on some level when I was younger.
I think what changed this for me was rewatching the films over a few year period. Not to say I think any less of Connery - FRWL is my favourite Bond film after all, and Connery's performance is a key factor in that - but I do remember rewatching some of the Moore films a few years ago and really getting a lot out of them - TSWLM and OP in particular. There's just something about the way Moore plays the character in those films that feels so human, albeit with his idiosyncratic tongue in cheek charisma that's very much James Bond for me. By contrast I felt that Connery in TB and YOLT looked bored and wasn't quite as captivating, and I've never rated his performances in DAF and NSNA all that highly either. Honestly, performances such as Dalton's in LTK or Brosnan's in GE were a lot more magnetic to me, much more what I see as James Bond. I'm also of an age where all the Bond films I've seen in the cinema have been the Craig instalments. A big part of Bond nostalgia for me is actually rewatching CR and SF and remembering when they first came out, remembering how captivated I was with Craig's Bond performances in those films. While I watched Connery's films prior, I can't deny that both those films and Craig's Bond made just as much an impact on me.
It's like I always say, there's no single definitive cinematic Bond. And thank God for that.
I do agree that he is surprisingly more human in the part than may first appear.
In terms of best though I also agree that it's Connery and Craig up there at the top for me.
It's difficult for me to say which Bond is the best. I tend to joke I can never decide between Craig and Connery, so I default to Moore. Then again I think Dalton is fantastic as well, although Brosnan's first two Bond performances are ones I think amongst the best of the series... so I suppose I have to default to Lazenby, and let's be honest, Lazenby is very few people's favourite Bond and certainly not mine despite his great moments! Really I find it easier to think of my favourite individual performances from each film/actor.
It’s hard to pick a favorite honestly, but it comes down to either Brosnan or Moore for me. Brosnan was perfect in the role imo and I always wish he had been afforded one more film that was a bit more down to earth than DAD. But regardless he defined the role for an entire generation (including myself) and he succeeded in the task of bringing Bond into the modern world. Meanwhile Moore has slowly been climbing up my list of favorites due to the sheer volume with which I watch his films. I’m always putting on a Moore film if I want something light and easy to watch; usually it’s LALD or TMWTGG (even if both those films aren’t in my Top 10.) Plus Moore is just so affable a film presence that it’s hard not to smile whenever he’s on screen, and he really sells the dramatic moments as exemplified in both TSWLM and OP.
But my opinions may vary, and Connery may find himself my favorite again so who knows…
The movie itself is not that bad. The plot was quite original and fresh at the time. And it had a plot, you can't say the same thing about LALD.
But but it's a transitional movie...
NSNA is better as comeback movie, the tone was right.
It’d be a problem only if Connery was uncomfortable and putting in a poor performance— which he is far from doing.
The problem resides in what feels like a rushed third act that displayed the most horrible and cheap effects.
But Connery being an issue? No way.
Connery is fine in DAF but I think people don't like this approach because it's Connery.
It's not what they want from Connery.
The main complaint I hear about Connery isn’t his performance, but his appearance.
Personally, I think it lends to the setting and the film.
The best Bond performances for me are the ones where the actor’s natural strengths mix with those Bondian qualities, and you start to see them as a distinct but ultimately organic/natural version of James Bond. Ideally the script is right for them. For me it’s the likes of Craig in CR/SF, Brosnan in GE, Moore in TSWLM, and Connery in FRWL and GF.
I don't know who Benoit Blanc is, but aside from that, I agree with all that. It's EXACTLY how I feel.
I really hope I'm wrong, but I think it'll get worse with the next 'Bondverse'.
Why do you think it will get worse?
Personally, I'd look at it like this: there will also be people who'll really like the next film (or indeed films). There may even be future Bond fans whose first film will be Bond 26, the next actor their first Bond etc. It's likely the majority of people will enjoy the next few films, regardless of whether they're fans of the series or not.
Because NTTD stunk (for me), yet lots of people loved it and it was a smash hit. So I think they'll go along the same ('ground-breaking') lines for the next one, and the next cinematic James Bond will be even further removed from the essence of the character Fleming created.
I honestly hope I'm wrong.
I am confident that the next Bond films will be vastly different. NTTD feels like a one time only thing to me. I don't think audiences want two of it. Besides, a fresh take on things always sells better, especially after a big hiatus and with a new actor. I think we can rest assured, @ColonelAdamski, that B26 will walk away from the recent era. The Craig era is gone. NTTD made that explicitly clear to us. There's no point for them in doing it all over again.
Even this Craig fan doesn't want a repeat of what was done in the past couple of movies. We were served meals that I liked to eat, but they left me bloated and needing to hit the gym. It's time for some lighter meals again.
If anything I'd say that thematic connection to Fleming has been getting stronger in the Bond films, and it's been a long process that predates Craig. So I don't quite follow the above argument...
I haven't given that much thought yet, but I will. Nevertheless, books and films are two very different things, even when one inspires the other. Fleming's Bond is not necessarily EON's Bond, which is why I don't always agree that because Fleming's Bond never did a certain thing, it's not allowed for the cinematic Bond to do it. Also, Fleming's Bond stopped in the 1960's. We're 60 years past that point in the movies.
Still, I have very few complaints about the Craig era myself, but I don't think we have to expect the next era to be identical to it.
I also feel that the Craig era gave us something very close to Fleming-Bond in spirit, especially the man that was depicted in the last three books.
So every time I hear that Craig was getting us further and further away from Fleming, I shrug my shoulders and wonder if we are all reading the same books?
I dunno. I was incredibly pleased with Craig but we are not getting 2.0 with the new era— I personally wouldn’t want that either. I have Craig’s five. Now I’m looking forward to seeing another perspective.
Only one issue? The big problem for me, and the film has numerous, is the lackadaisical performance from Connery.