Controversial opinions about Bond films

15758606263707

Comments

  • I see a lot of similarities myself between Roberts and Richards. I'd rate Roberts a marginally better actress though, she's not nearly as monotone. Richards is the Hugo Drax of Bond girls, with much less entertaining lines to say.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    I see a lot of similarities myself between Roberts and Richards.

    I just scanned this sentence and read it as 'I see a lot of similarities between myself, Roberts and Richards'.
  • RC7 wrote:
    I see a lot of similarities myself between Roberts and Richards.

    I just scanned this sentence and read it as 'I see a lot of similarities between myself, Roberts and Richards'.

    I'm not seeing this as improper grammar, but I can change it to "I myself" or drop "myself" if you'd prefer. Perhaps you've had a tough day on the eyes?

    I'm still waiting for someone to say how crazy I am for finding Max more entertaining than Richards and Roberts. Maybe I'm not so crazy after all?

  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    RC7 wrote:
    I see a lot of similarities myself between Roberts and Richards.

    I just scanned this sentence and read it as 'I see a lot of similarities between myself, Roberts and Richards'.

    I'm not seeing this as improper grammar, but I can change it to "I myself" or drop "myself" if you'd prefer. Perhaps you've had a tough day on the eyes?

    Ah no, it was my malfunctioning brain. The thought of you drawing parallels between yourself, Roberts and Richards amused me.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    RC7 wrote:
    I see a lot of similarities myself between Roberts and Richards.

    I just scanned this sentence and read it as 'I see a lot of similarities between myself, Roberts and Richards'.

    I'm not seeing this as improper grammar, but I can change it to "I myself" or drop "myself" if you'd prefer. Perhaps you've had a tough day on the eyes?

    Ah no, it was my malfunctioning brain. The thought of you drawing parallels between yourself, Roberts and Richards amused me.
  • saunderssaunders Living in a world of avarice and deceit
    Posts: 987
    RC7 wrote:
    I see a lot of similarities myself between Roberts and Richards.

    I just scanned this sentence and read it as 'I see a lot of similarities between myself, Roberts and Richards'.

    I'm not seeing this as improper grammar, but I can change it to "I myself" or drop "myself" if you'd prefer. Perhaps you've had a tough day on the eyes?

    I'm still waiting for someone to say how crazy I am for finding Max more entertaining than Richards and Roberts. Maybe I'm not so crazy after all?

    No, you are. :) For all Richard's alleged monotone performance, she has a far greater range of vocabulary than Max (even if you include his TLD cameo) and looks far, far greater sweating in hot pants and a tank top than Max ever would and surely that in itself is the pinnacle of entertainment!
  • @saunders- I find nothing "alleged" about Richards' monotone performance. However, being a fellow lecher in good standing, I do understand where Richards' greater entertainment value lies :)
  • saunders wrote:
    I genuinely found Denise Richards totally believable as a nuclear physicist.

    Heh! Now that's the craziest post I've seen in this thread.

  • Dragonpol wrote:
    saunders wrote:
    I genuinely found Denise Richards totally believable as a nuclear physicist.

    Snap. I've never understood all the fuss about that - she wasn't a Mary Goodnight sort by any stretch.

    Would you go as far to say that Richards was a better actress than Britt Ekland? I wouldn't.

    Me neither. Ekland's character was a silly ditz and that's exactly how Ekland portrayed her. Richards' character should have been a genius, yet she portrayed her as a doe-eyed Midwestern cheerleader. And to be honest, I don't think Richards was capable of playing her any other way. Quite possibly the worst casting decision in the history of Bond cinema.

  • saunderssaunders Living in a world of avarice and deceit
    Posts: 987
    @saunders- I find nothing "alleged" about Richards' monotone performance. However, being a fellow lecher in good standing, I do understand where Richards' greater entertainment value lies :)

    It's heart-warming to find that despite our great differences regarding Denise Richard's acting abilities we can still find such a wealth of common ground. :)
  • pachazo wrote:
    saunders wrote:
    It's almost as if the general feeling is that she can't be young and sexy while having an intelligent mind.
    I've never had that feeling. I find Natalya from GE to be young, sexy and intelligent. Denise Richards not so much.

    Quite.

  • saunderssaunders Living in a world of avarice and deceit
    Posts: 987
    I'm beginning to think I may be in the minority on this one!
  • saunders wrote:
    pachazo wrote:
    saunders wrote:
    It's almost as if the general feeling is that she can't be young and sexy while having an intelligent mind.
    I've never had that feeling. I find Natalya from GE to be young, sexy and intelligent. Denise Richards not so much.

    I wonder if Natalya's Russian accent lends her young character a sense of gravitas that is maybe missing from Dr Jones all American accent? Regardless I still consider them both capable young ladies equally suitable for their professions, yes at 25 Christmas is rather young (but not impossibly) for her job, but surely it's ok by Bond standards of realism. Does Denise Richards honestly really deserve the level of bile and condemnation she receives for this role?

    Yes. She, along with Babs Bach and Halle Berry are the Troika of Terror among Bond girls.
  • I see a lot of similarities myself between Roberts and Richards. I'd rate Roberts a marginally better actress though, she's not nearly as monotone. Richards is the Hugo Drax of Bond girls, with much less entertaining lines to say.

    Roberts is no Ingrid Bergman, unless compared to Denise Richards.

  • saunderssaunders Living in a world of avarice and deceit
    Posts: 987
    Have you ever considered that maybe she was trying to play the character monotone, I remember from school that many scientists are really flat and boring in their delivery, could it be that we are just not giving the talented actress enough credit for adding such a masterful stroke of realism to her performance? ;)
  • Dragonpol wrote:
    saunders wrote:
    I genuinely found Denise Richards totally believable as a nuclear physicist.

    Snap. I've never understood all the fuss about that - she wasn't a Mary Goodnight sort by any stretch.

    Would you go as far to say that Richards was a better actress than Britt Ekland? I wouldn't.

    Me neither. Ekland's character was a silly ditz and that's exactly how Ekland portrayed her. Richards' character should have been a genius, yet she portrayed her as a doe-eyed Midwestern cheerleader. And to be honest, I don't think Richards was capable of playing her any other way. Quite possibly the worst casting decision in the history of Bond cinema.

    That's exactly my point about Ekland. I think Britt played the ditz quite well while providing some very nice scenery for the eyes and senses. Richards managed to be a ditz while trying her best not to be.
    saunders wrote:

    It's heart-warming to find that despite our great differences regarding Denise Richards' acting abilities we can still find such a wealth of common ground. :)

    Indeed. A glowing tribute to our respective libidos, Mr. Saunders.
    saunders wrote:
    Have you ever considered that maybe she was trying to play the character monotone, I remember from school that many scientists are really flat and boring in their delivery, could it be that we are just not giving the talented actress enough credit for adding such a masterful stroke of realism to her performance? ;)

    I'm starting to think you're full of whimsy today.
  • Sorry Mr Saunders, but Richards just didn't convince in any capacity in the role of that years character. I've seen her in one or two other releases such as Starship Troopers, and no, she wasn't very good in that either
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    saunders wrote:
    I'm beginning to think I may be in the minority on this one!

    I liked her in TWINE, I had no real problem with her. Easy on the eyes, as all female scientists should be in Bond's 'verse.
  • edited September 2013 Posts: 3,494
    chrisisall wrote:
    saunders wrote:
    I'm beginning to think I may be in the minority on this one!

    I liked her in TWINE, I had no real problem with her. Easy on the eyes, as all female scientists should be in Bond's 'verse.

    Both pretty and yet the most breathtakingly stupid scientist ever. Yes, I concur :P

  • Lancaster007Lancaster007 Shrublands Health Clinic, England
    Posts: 1,874
    I totally believe Richards. All nuclear scientists look like that in my world.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    When I first saw TWINE, I thought Christmas Jones was an assistant. :))
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 6,288
    Dragonpol wrote:
    saunders wrote:
    I genuinely found Denise Richards totally believable as a nuclear physicist.

    Snap. I've never understood all the fuss about that - she wasn't a Mary Goodnight sort by any stretch.

    Would you go as far to say that Richards was a better actress than Britt Ekland? I wouldn't.

    No, but Jones is better written than ditzy Goodnight.
  • saunders wrote:
    Have you ever considered that maybe she was trying to play the character monotone, I remember from school that many scientists are really flat and boring in their delivery, could it be that we are just not giving the talented actress enough credit for adding such a masterful stroke of realism to her performance? ;)

    Well, I think she probably gave as much thought to how to approach the character as Lazzer did but hey we all know why she was cast, Brozzer was a lucky boy that particular year!

  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    saunders wrote:
    I genuinely found Denise Richards totally believable as a nuclear physicist.

    I never got why everyone hated her either. I didn't think she was bad in the role and she looked great. There have been much worse Bond girls.
    Dragonpol wrote:
    I love Max the parrot.

    I love the Thatchers Coda. And I'm a fan of Maggie.

    I'm with you on both points there.

    Indeed. Lovely stuff.

    I'll never really understand why some people liked that woman.

    I think Max was a parrot man, not a woman?
    And Denise in a t-shirt and pair of shorts was the best thing about that movie.
  • Posts: 2,402
    Richards is all show and no go in the tradition of Bach and Roberts. T&A doesn't mean you're a great actress. I certainly don't mind hotties like these from the view of my personal jollies, but when we start to pretend that they're competent past that...so my controversial opinion is that Max The Parrot was a better actor than those three :)

    I believe this is the best post ever made on MI6. Kudos, Sir Henry.
  • Posts: 1,977
    Having recently watched the Moore Bonds again, I thought perhaps I'd find a way to appreciate Moore's contributions to the series. I did not. If anything, I found myself distracted by the silly nods to pop culture, ridiculous bits such as the gondola with wheels, double-take pigeon, Tarzan yell, Beach Boys song, Jaws, etc. What an abysmal decent into silliness and camp for a series that started out so well.

    Hard to say why all this went so terribly wrong. Yes, I know Moore has his fans and the series was very profitable during his tenure, but sitting though each installment was a nail in the coffin. The books and Connery and OHMSS were the only things keeping me going in the hopes that a new actor would turn things around. Dalton and Craig filled that gap for me, but not Brosnan, although he did the camp and light comedy much better than Moore.

    I am glad to see the series return to a grittier feel. Craig can lighten up a bit, but Connery style, not Moore style.

    Hopefully the series can move forward by recapturing the feel of the early films, and yet create original storylines. Too often the series has been influenced by other films.
    In the early days, the influence was the novels, not the latest blockbuster.

  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,270
    CrabKey wrote:
    Having recently watched the Moore Bonds again, I thought perhaps I'd find a way to appreciate Moore's contributions to the series. I did not. If anything, I found myself distracted by the silly nods to pop culture, ridiculous bits such as the gondola with wheels, double-take pigeon, Tarzan yell, Beach Boys song, Jaws, etc. What an abysmal decent into silliness and camp for a series that started out so well.

    Hard to say why all this went so terribly wrong. Yes, I know Moore has his fans and the series was very profitable during his tenure, but sitting though each installment was a nail in the coffin. The books and Connery and OHMSS were the only things keeping me going in the hopes that a new actor would turn things around. Dalton and Craig filled that gap for me, but not Brosnan, although he did the camp and light comedy much better than Moore.

    I am glad to see the series return to a grittier feel. Craig can lighten up a bit, but Connery style, not Moore style.

    Hopefully the series can move forward by recapturing the feel of the early films, and yet create original storylines. Too often the series has been influenced by other films.
    In the early days, the influence was the novels, not the latest blockbuster.

    Very well said. I concur.
  • Posts: 2,402
    Not sure how controversial this is, but...

    I actually really like how Brad Whitaker is written. I love the idea of him being obsessed with military tactics and having this high opinion of himself, even though he was kicked out of West Point and really has zero credibility as anything military. It's a great Bond villain gimmick IMO. The problem with Whitaker is that Baker is a terrible, terrible, TERRIBLE actor.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,270
    Not sure how controversial this is, but...

    I actually really like how Brad Whitaker is written. I love the idea of him being obsessed with military tactics and having this high opinion of himself, even though he was kicked out of West Point and really has zero credibility as anything military. It's a great Bond villain gimmick IMO. The problem with Whitaker is that Baker is a terrible, terrible, TERRIBLE actor.

    I agree - I like Brad Whitaker and his hubris too. I intend to write something on this at some point as again he's very underappreciated as a villain.
  • saunderssaunders Living in a world of avarice and deceit
    Posts: 987
    Not sure how controversial this is, but...

    I actually really like how Brad Whitaker is written. I love the idea of him being obsessed with military tactics and having this high opinion of himself, even though he was kicked out of West Point and really has zero credibility as anything military. It's a great Bond villain gimmick IMO. The problem with Whitaker is that Baker is a terrible, terrible, TERRIBLE actor.

    I've never had a problem with Brad Whitaker, I found him a refreshing change from previous villains and his limited screen time offset any limitations Baker may of had as an actor. I liked the idea of his character pulling the strings in the background while letting everyone else, from his own associates to the British Secret Service, carry out his dirty work. The fact that he hid his criminal activities behind a wealthy, patron of the arts façade seems very believable, and if he wasn't in much of the film did that really matter when he was so ably served by Koscov and Necros. His lair while amazingly beautiful and well equipped with pools, exotic food, gorgeous girls and machine pistols seems far more realistic than the vast 'hollowed out volcano' pinewood sets of old. The final battle in his personnel military warfare museum was well realised and a fitting end for a global arms dealer, it's a shame such a great character had to die and be reincarnated as the appalling Jack Wade.

Sign In or Register to comment.