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
OP, of course, had one of the best Bond girls. Maud Adams was sensational as Octopussy and definitely my kind of a woman. Powerful, mature, beautiful, not afraid to overpower men using her sexuality against them as are her girls. Kind of a replica of Pussy Galore, which is why I love them both.
But, OP had a very forgettable villain, only slightly more memorable than Kristatos, who pretty much is a bland screen presence even though I like him.
NSNA on the other hand, other than the weaker Domino (seriously, compared to TB's Domino, I've no affections for Kim Basinger's version), had the better characters, a crazy femme fatale (Xenia Onatopp's prototype), and Sean Connery being his Bond again (as opposed to the bored persona he had in DAF).
Need I go on?
I feel OP's fast paced direction has dated better, but NSNA has novelty value. The film would have been far more memorable if it wasn't seen by many as an inferior remake of TB.
Its on the forum right now,for the next comment.
@BondAficionado, I wouldn't say it about Q, no. He always had that grandfatherly image about him and already seemed like that kind of character before the 70s were up and running, so I never take issue with his aging. He's just the old man tinkering away in his workshop. He's not like Bond who has to constantly go out into the field and do physical trials to survive, which doesn't work with a very old looking actor. Q never had this issue for obvious reasons. Desmond also never lost a step at any point, and he is always the light in some very shaky films, so I'm happy he was there to rescue things.
The original Bond team will always be respected, but sometimes you just have to let people go. The fact that Lois wanted to be the new M after her turn as Moneypenny proves this. We all love her, but come on, now. At times, you can go too far.
I'm starting to feel that way lately. I like the atmosphere and the sets more. The whole thing, even though ridiculously silly sometimes, seems to be more lively.
He wasn't the only one who was practically desk bound. For me, MP and M also seemed just as old/static as Q was. I always thought of them as one entity because we usually see them together at M's office or in quick succession. So if Q is considered 'grandfatherly' then MP is just as much 'grandmotherly' if you get what I mean.
They did something similar in OP by pairing him with Douglas Wilmer for the auction scene (also a refined setting for the wealthy), but it worked in that film.
I think their ages seemed more accentuated because of the setting, the outfits and because Walken & Jones were much younger, in contrast to Jourdan (who was actually older than Moore) in OP.
I'd say it's the best Brosnan movie. It certainly doesn't get boring, and it has a more consistent tone than any of the others. They also knock out all the melodrama at once, early on, so we're not forced to watch another horror show like the Goldeneye beach scene or nearly anything that happens in TWINE.
So GE is not high on your list then?
Controversial opinion: while SF is the better movie I prefer SP.
Very funny, @Ludovico. :)
P.S. I have GE around 5th-7th place normally.
Just sayin'...
My only real issue with Craig currently is that in SP his character seemed to have morphed into a hybrid of Connery/Moore and Brosnan.
Otherwise I think he's largely been great and I admit it took me a while to really appreciate him.
Anyone with a knee injury knows that rehab is anywhere from six to twelve weeks, and then it's more physio/strength training time... It's a painful process.
Apart from mendes forcing his lead actor to fit into a mold, you also had that actor probably chewing on tylenol threes and being in not the best of spirits.
DC is a wonderful actor with animal magnetism. The next director shouldn't straight-jacket this, but unleash it.
In the end, if SP was DC's last, I hope people look at the body of work and say, although SP may have been his weakest, as a whole, though, he delivered an interesting portrayal of 007.
What I've noted over the years though is that more money to a movie budget doesn't mean higher quality, especially not in the long run. There's an optimum somewhere, and with SF's hughe success, they went and spent too much on SP. I hope Craig returns for one more film, with the same budget as CR, and different writers... ah.... b*gger.
One thing I noticed in my SP viewing yesterday is that Ralph Fiennes was bloody awful. Not only did he muck up every scene with Craig (and even the intro with Madeline - what the heck was that?) but he also botched the scenes with the unmemorable and oily 'C' (and yes, this chap's name doesn't stand for careless to me, but rather the more obvious c***). His delivery of the 'not to kill' speech is cringeworthy in the extreme.
Craig had more enthusiasm when looking at a monitor of Dench spouting something about Sciarra than he had in any scene with Fiennes.
Darn shame, because he was rather good in SF.
Still, I will always be glad he was around to veto the "M's a traitor" idea.
Edit: sorry @bondjames, this may not be such a controversial opinion after all.
I just realized yesterday how absolutely cringeworthy nearly every scene he's in is, including the finale at C's HQ. It's as if he doesn't want to be there.