Reporting For Duty
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Categories
Stupid In A Bond movie?
chrisisall
Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
I just watched Never Say Never Again for the first time in way over ten years on a new blu ray.
And now I will say it; I hate the stupid.
The stupid (like, really stupid) started in The Spy Who Loved Me and ended (mostly) with A View To A kill. John Glen was *trying* to make them more serious with Roger Moore, but it wasn't working so much. Never Say Never Again came out the same year as Octopussy, and I'll say this: I will never watch either again. Stupid.
Early Connery, Tim, or Pierce. Or the one with Diana Rigg. Okay, Moore's first two too.....
And now I will say it; I hate the stupid.
The stupid (like, really stupid) started in The Spy Who Loved Me and ended (mostly) with A View To A kill. John Glen was *trying* to make them more serious with Roger Moore, but it wasn't working so much. Never Say Never Again came out the same year as Octopussy, and I'll say this: I will never watch either again. Stupid.
Early Connery, Tim, or Pierce. Or the one with Diana Rigg. Okay, Moore's first two too.....
^ 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’m sure most of us will list the same things.
We could also go through each of the Bond films and list each of those stupid or silly moments that we find infuriating.
The same for the books, I can list them one by one! 😄
The James Bond Franchise had its shares of stupid things just like the every other franchises, so it's not comes off to me as surprising.
And despite of them having some stupid things, I could still enjoy them for what they are, it's not that I'm not watching them because of just that, I'm watching them because as a Bond fan (fan of James Bond in general), I'm going to accept them for what they are with open mind.
It is also not dependent on the Bond actor or his tenure. If "stupid" is a criterion, I can't see the Brosnan "era" standing out from the rest. Rather the opposite (and I like the first two of them). The most "serious" of the bunch, besides OHMSS (because it is so close to the novel), must be the Craig films, and they have been much criticized for allegedly having dropped all the fun. But there's no doubt that some aspects (do I need to mention "foster brother"?) are also "stupid".
There's no accounting for personal taste, and any of this is far from objective.
Sorry. I was in a bad mood right after watching NSNA last night. I will watch Octopussy again- it has some terrific moments in it. And if some parts are stupid (and they are) it's never boring.
- Tarzan tell
- Cleavage zooming
- “Sit” for the tiger
- a few snippets of stereotyped India
Would hardly change the film. In stark contrast to Bond “turning Japanese” in YOLT… that’s about the dumbest thing in the Bond series I can think of.
Funny, the sittt at the tiger made me laugh. Desperate time; try something from a cat trainer!
But then you would get head-on into the same "censorship" discussion that is just now raging about the Fleming novels. Sure it might have been a better film without that nonsense, but even though I don't really like Octopussy, we shouldn't advocate the kind of re-editing that George Lucas did on his first Star Wars movies.
As I probably have said many times before, it may be because I watched NSNA several times before I ever saw TB, and therefore lack the reflex of saying that it was just a bad remake...especially since I find it more entertaining than the original. And yes, with its contemporary competitor (OP), I can only say that I much prefer NSNA over that. As with about a third of the other "official" films.
And those Jaws moments you mentioned, @chrisisall, are indeed stupid. I love MR nonetheless, and more than TSWLM.
Some "stupid" things I can think of within some of the films:
Those are just a few "stupid" things that I can think of!
Agreed. Perhaps Drax employed a technology we didn't see to get his station up there without anyone noticing- but we DID see Jaws cut through a steel cable with steel teeth and very human jaw muscles. That's Don't think too hard about it Vs. Don't look at what you're seeing.... LOL
He drags M to his childhood home just to get her killed and even worse gets himself killed 2 films later. :(
If 007 can effortlessy put on clown makeup and a costume with just seconds to spare before an atomic bomb goes off, he could've escaped that damned island in NTTD.
And the excuse that Craig's Bond is a different timeline to Moore, Connery, etc is just stupid.
Bond is Bond regardless who plays him.
That's my rant on The Stupid.
However, I can let Tarzam yells, Bond in dungarees and elephants pushing Sherrif JW Pepper into the water slide.
So does May Day turning good in AVTAK also qualify as stupid for you? At least with Jaws, they use him as the butt of jokes in TSWLM and his biting the shark set up us not being able to take him seriously again and MR just ups the ante from the start. He mostly lost his deadly killer status, so the switching sides actually works in that capacity, and is a good move on Bond's part. The most menacing thing Jaws does in MR is almost bite Manuela in the Rio alley.
The May Day turning is one of my most cringeworthy moments of the series in a film filled with them. They set her up as a formidable foe and built some of the marketing campaign around the character - "Has James Bond finally met his match?" She's murdered several of Bond's colleagues and now the two are about to have it out in the mine and instead we get sparkling dialogue to explain the switch like "And I thought that creep loved me." Then she becomes a martyr.
^^ THIS!!^^
Even in the earlier films, Bond had some shares of stupidity in him, the most primary example of this is when he'd thrown the ATAC machine far away in FYEO, like the whole movie focused on the retrieval of that thing, it's supposed to be his mission, yet at the end he'd decided to just thrown it away, and it's like the movie told us that it didn't made sense in the end, like it's not all worth it because at the end, he'd just thrown it away, it's not being selfish, but it's his job, he's given that mission (Melina's father even died because of it), Bond risked his life for that damn ATAC machine, yet at the end he would just thrown it away.
Even his usage of that third nipple gadget in TMWTGG, doesn't makes sense either because the enemy would still recognized him given that his face was different from Scaramanga's, and not even thinking that this guy named Hai Fat given his connections to Scaramanga could have possibly met the real Scaramanga, and clearly knows what he looks like.
Even in the earlier films, Bond had his shares of stupidity.
Luckily, Anya was there to immediately ascertain the cylinder head gasket was the problem.
They're the most stupid, they're rich, yet stupid.
Especially the earlier Bond villains made the later/modern Bond villains quite intelligent in comparison.
Like does Bond really need to deal with those type of villains? For me, they're one or two dimensional villains.
Why? Because they made some decisions that would make your head scratch, and the worst? Bond outwitted some of them in numerous occasions.
I'd liked my Bond villain not just to be threatening but also to be three dimensional as well, no doubt many people liked Alec Trevelyan, because you just couldn't messed up with the guy, he's calculated, reasonable in his actions, not stupid, have personality, he'd made his plans unexpectedly, have inner grit, he's probably the realistically evil Bond villain.
True. The screenwriters overlooked a major detail there.
Perhaps it was the intern’s job to go over the laptop before handing it over to Q?
But at the end of the day, is it the fault of an intern?
Should Q not have checked all was good before plugging in.?
No, it was C. You see, before C became C, he had already infiltrated MI6 as a non-descript "confiscated-terrorist-laptop-handler." And since Silva was working for Blofeld, C allowed the virus to infect MI6. It's all connected--all of it. Kookoo!
So you're saying it was the writers intention to subtlety include a storyline from SP in SF to make the storyline even more concrete?
That's genius.
Yes! And it goes beyond that. When Bond fell off the train in the PTS of SF, and then hit the water, he must have "felt" a serious "blow". Felt - Blow. Blow - Felt. BLOFELD! They were telling us in broad strokes that Blofeld was behind it all long before 2015! I'm telling you, it's alllll connected!
@DarthDimi stop, you're freaking me out.
The author of all of MI6's technical oversights....