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 liked both Renard and Elektra, and thought that they made a good duo in villainy. Elektra came up with the plan, and Renard carried it out without question, even costing himself his own life. The backstory kidnapping behind both of them was complex but provided a good explanation of where they stood during the events of TWINE.
interesting observation. i hadn't realised brossa was more of a UA imposition than EON choice. he sucked but i guess he kept the show on the road. the 90s and early 2000s were such a missed opportunity for bond. musically and stylistically there was the chance to do something amazing but what we got was dross. i feel with cr and qos we are now only just getting back to point wher dalton left off. that's almost two wasted decades.
i call it the interregulum. The period that can be avoided. To me the Bonds jump between Licence to Kill and Casino Royale.
There are good aspects to Brozzers period ie Dr Kaufman, Electra, most of Goldeneye but they dont hold a candle to the powerhouse Bond eras either side.
TND - other than a few good scenes - really does feel like a film for teenagers. Even Brozza himself thought that the film "wasn't up to speed".
TWINE is a bit better in my mind because, while it's flawed, it at least tries harder to tell a story.
Then there's DAD.
I like Dalton's films but I'm not sure if I'd call them "powerhouse" either. Apparently Dalton wasn't too fond of LTK.
The biggest problem of any era.
It's just Connery's YOLT or Moore's MR. Perhaps the Craig era will face a similar project at one point. ;-)
I am afraid not.
DAD cannot even attempt to achieve the pinnacles in filmaking the other two are. Craigs got quite alot of sway over Eon nowadays I cant see him agreeing to 'Yo Mamma' or invisible cars can you?
The invisible car was actually the LEAST of DAD's problems.
Heresy! YOLT is an all time high. Pure cinematic gold dust. Where would austin powers and dr evil be without that movie? but seriuosly, i love that film and even MR has good parts.
Miranda Frost wasn't too bad. Rosamund Pike is an elagant actress who is more than capable.
Yeah, Miranda Frost was the good part of Die Another Day. It's villains like Gustav Graves, Zao, and Mr. Kil that ruined the movie!
Hahaha. For all the genious behind the Bond movies, Mr. Kil provides us with an accurate picture of just how desperate the directors were for new ideas!
I'd say the opposite. It shows they weren't even trying.
No, an All Time High was Octopussy. ;)
Rosamund Pike isn't a bad actress, the part was bad. I'll say her and Karl Urban probably saved the Doom movie (apart from the awesome fps sequence).
Now there's a name to die for.
I disagree and Casino Royale was great and way closer to the novel then Goldeneye was too Moonraker (we all know parts of the novel was used in the film) Goldeneye bastardizes Moonraker
In fact Goldeneye for the Wii is more interesting then the film.... goldeneye for N64 was more better then the film.
Oh and Based on what info we know Goldeneye for Super Nintendo had better graphics then all of the CGI in die another Day.
Cant believe any one actually thinks GE, which is appalling, is better than CR.
I recently came across the astonishingly impressive series of commentaries in haphazardstuff.com. I was amazed to discover that this reviewer has expressed scene by scene exactly why the Brosnan movies are so awful. Start with GoldenEye:
http://haphazardstuff.com/TheBrosnanAgeGoldenEye.html
This guy is brilliant. Should be given a chair in Bond studies somewhere.
If you actually LISTEN to the review he doesn't say it's a dud. He says he likes it but it has its problems. He says at the end of the DAD review that it seemed like an encouraging start to an era which ended up disappointing.
Never thought that people may not have the same opinion as you ? :-?
Care to back up this statement with actual arguments?