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
hear hear!
I think the main problem is that she's actually too hot for the character she's supposed to play. Take Holly Goodhead. She's as bland and boring as a scientist is perceived to be by the crisp-eating-beer-drinking general public. A real life Christmas Jones would happen to have all her male classmates fail every class she was in.
I think her acting is actually quite good. Not only in this film, but also in i.e. starship troopers. People just have too much trouble looking past her increadable hotness. Same goes for Liz Hurley.
I always liked Richards. She's not the best actress in the world but I think she would be the first to tell you that.
An Academy-Award winning actress wouldn't have made that character any better. Richards did alright. And she's very pleasing on the eye, obviously.
It is one of the few films that has gone way, way up in my estimation over the years, I used to be a bit meh about Starship Troopers, but I now think it’s an intelligent, thoughtful, well-made and well-casted satire about how the modern state interacts and manipulates its own population.
Unlike TWINE :))
I read somewhere recently that Starship Troopers is going through some kind of renaissance. I've never seen it though. I'll see if I can find where I read that.
EDIT: Saw this as well, maybe it'd would be of some interest to you.
https://www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/how-starship-troopers-aligns-with-our-moment-of-american-defeat
It’s also a bit too ‘film soundtrack’y. If the film GF didn’t exist, then no one would write the song.
Whereas Diamonds are Forever is the sort of song that still works without its film. It’s a song about diamonds.
Also, I personally think the song’s intro is perfect. The melody of the intro is the aural version of light sparkling off diamonds. Wonderful
I saw ST when it came out, on the big screen, and (apart from the scene where they land on the planet, which was surprisingly epic and moving) I was really disappointed. It felt so shallow and childish. And the characters were impossibly good-looking! And so immature! And there were too many jokes!
It was a long time before the film worked its way through my preconception filters and I understood how well made it was.
The version of GF from the Wolf of Wall Street made it onto my Bond playlist recently; I'd give it a try if I were you.
I always enjoyed Goldfinger, but song for song maybe Diamonds Are Forever is the best one. It certainly is far superior to its movie. In fact it's the only thing I enjoy of DAF now.
The main title sequence is the highlight of that film. Amazing song, poor film.
Couldn't agree more
Well, actually, it's a song about
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/3600194/A-word-is-worth-1000-notes.html
Up until that point they are very effective, driven, and competent hitmen. The fact they are in a relationship together does not impact on the ability to do their jobs, its just there as a part of their characters. None of the other characters comment on their relationship in anyway, its just accepted and is there. So when Bond pulls his tails between Wint's legs, and we get the "oooooh", it really really annoys me. To go for a pretty cheap homosexual joke at the very end completely undoes it all. Should've been left on the cutting room floor.
Dalton should of done 4
Janus should of been developed over a series of films
Spectre should not of been introduced in the Craig era (quantum should of been the main organization)
They're pretty much the same though (evil globalist organization looking to extort money from countries), so I was never bothered by this the revelation of Quantum being a subsidiary of Spectre. If anything, QOS should have just left them unnamed, especially since their name is only mentioned twice in both times in such an understated way. It's also just dumb ****ing name that confuses the title of the film IMO (Terrorist Organization of Comfort???).
what abnnyos me is people complained about Quantum's plan for being to small but Spectre's seemed similarly small...
as for me Eon has been poor with their evil organization uses since really 1989
I dunno if I would call instance access to all intelligence organizations of nine different countries as "small".
Thanks for that! Very nice read, and indeed, shows Verhoeven's genius.
They are hardly effective and competent though are they? Yeah they killed a few people but before the end of the film they have already tried and failed to kill Bond twice! And they make the classic Bond villain mistake of leaving him unconscious to die without sticking around to make sure the job was done properly!
Of course, in OHMSS Bond himself makes the same mistake (as Wint and Kidd in DAF), leaving Blofeld hanging from the branch.
I believe the 1976 ABC Sunday Night Movie re-edit of OHMSS is vastly superior to the original film.
It's longer, has a cool film noir style voice over narration, and reminds me of PULP FICTION in that sections of the story are played out of sequence.
I think Fukunaga should seriously consider using this version as a template and go back to the editing room with NTTD. Let's mix things up a bit shall we?
Just kidding.
Just wanted to stir up the pot a bit.
Carry on.
[That was awesome, @ToTheRight.]
What's the difference? I haven't seen it and I'd like to know...
Thanks, @RichardTheBruce.
That would be quite interesting. I was just watching the new Blu-ray of Hammer's KISS OF THE VAMPIRE . The television re-edit KISS OF EVIL is included and reminded me of the ABC version of OHMSS
. So I posted my little joke comment.
I actually really liked the ABC re-edit of SUPERMAN II and prefer the ABC version of SUPERMAN III to it's original film. The space title sequence makes a big difference to me.
Of course, the same can be said for a lot of TV airings that served as a gateway for Bond fans. I know that a lot of the Bond films I watched for the very first time were on TV marathons during Christmas, usually promoted as 007 Days of Bond.
I agree. Much rather see it as a bonus feature. In addition I wouldn't mind seeing some of the various title sequence re-edits included as an extra feature. I recall the title card for FYEO being oddly placed at the top pf the screen rather than the bottom on ABC. Also TMWTGG had several changes to Binder's titles on ABC.
Agreed. One weakness in GE for me was that the 007 vs. 006 antagonistic relationship lacked the dramatic antagonistic tension that the Bond vs. Sanchez one did. Another reason I wish Dalton had played Bond in GE instead of Brosnan.
@GoldenGun Here's some of it:
Bond history, seeing the failure myth across the years. Even so there are fan edits out there recreating that presentation. Interesting how things play out in the long view.