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
If they don't like watching old classic films, they are ignorant to the best cinema has to offer, outside of Bond.
I think GF still has some dark meat on its bones that steers it clear of "campy" territory. To each his own.
Dr No - where it all started, exotic, exciting, serious, entertaining
FRWL - Even more serious, epitome of the Fleming creation, dips in places
GF - Boring, Mundane, lack of action, an all round disappointment
TB - Great recovery, entertaining, action, Bond back to how he was before, gets a bit dull in places
YOLT - Disappointing, static, and lack of fresh ideas
OHMSS - One for all ages, new Bond, keeps the interest, goes off course every now and again
DAF - Stale, tired, desperate, a few moments of humor here and there, nothing special
LALD - a Masterpiece, Highly recommended, some very special ingredients
TMWTGG - Lively, Frantic, Entertaining, one to see
TSWLM - Fast Paced, Tangible, Some exciting sequences, awful title track
MR - Fun, Lively, Belligerent, Never a Dull Moment, Borderline Insane
YOLT - serious, fast paced, proper Bond, goes on too long, one of the better releases
OP - Adolescent nonsense, too much emphasis on unwanted humor, good in parts
AVTAK - An unmitigated disaster, an embarrassment to all concerned
TLD - Bond makes a recovery, steely, serious, straight faced, technical, although a bit mundane every now and again
LTK - Adult Bond, not for kids, too far detached from James Bond, goes so far of course sometimes, but a worthwhile watch, lack of adventure
GE - Straight faced, some absurd humor, lots of exciting locations, disappointing ending, belligerent music
TND - Boring, Dull, lacks excitement, poor characters, an 1990s variation of Goldfinger
TWINE - Superb opening, great Bond, Fleming creation, excitement, not all one way traffic
DAD - see A View to a Kill
CR - Bond begins, more adult focus Bond, serious, lack of humor, straight faced, good action sequences, fine music track, awful main Villain, sometimes a bit of an embarrassment, overall worthwhile watch
QOS - Blair Witch Project, Vomit inducing, hard to keep track of events, lively in places, poor characters, poor music, serious, action, ambiguous chain of events and character motives, one to avoid
Skyfall - ?
I meant For Your Eyes Only of course, (in between Moonraker and Octopussy)
You read fast Brady..
I-)
Well after taking mates to see QOS, they were anti Bond (QOS being there first film). I don't know why but I decided to show them AVTAK and there opinion changed instantly. They enjoyed it, thought it was good and Roger Moore was great. Just goes to show that to outsiders, films like AVTAK are the ones they want to see and not serious movies like QOS
I would recommend AVTAK based on experience
In that case, I'll say he would recommend LTK. Dr Kelson one that takes place in Asia like YOLT or TMWTGG and Turk LALD, I think.
You are correct there, that is true; there are some dark instances, like the deaths of the Masterton sisters, gassing the American hoods, the fight with Oddjob, and the the opening pre-title sequence. However, for even those moments, the camp and light-hearted instances tend to prevail a little bit more in the third release.
Very good point even in the light Bonds there are dark moments. I remember as a child watching my first Bonds on TV and being really scared by parts of Octopussy and Moonraker, but those moments actually made those films the most memorable for me. I think because these films (Moore/GF/DAF) are predominantly light-hearted that the darker scenes have more of an impact on kids. They're almost like the Disney films in that sense so for a young first time viewer I'd show one of those types of Bond. Craig/Dalton and early Connery are best left as gem's to be discovered later in life :)
if you don't come out loving those then its a lost cause
Spy's a difficult one for me. I like it, the photography is beautiful but Barbara Bach :-t She's attractive but I've realised her performance is ear-gratingly wooden at times.
I'd say GF is a better example.
GF has lots of what makes Spy a classic but I think Spy is faster paced and more exciting than GF.
I think people on this site have come to that assumption because it has been beaten over our heads so much on this site by certain members. I was never of that opinion, and am not now. How is she any worse of an actress than Lois Chiles or Claudine Auger? If anything one gets a taste of what the Bond women at that time were like: all lousy actresses, many of whom were overdubbed by Nikki Van der Zyl (Ms. Bach I don't believe was). I would most certainly recommend SPY to any newbie for it's big, over the top production, always cheeky Rog', big stunts, and iconic moments such as the parachute jump, the submerging Lotus, Jaws, and the incredible locations.
And I also agree with you on the film. I think it's a classic because of the reasons you listed, I think it's Moore's best and it's one of the most iconic, popular Bond films that for some reason is fairly underrated on here.