Never Say Never Again..."Yes, But My Martini's Still Dry"

17810121319

Comments

  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    chrisisall wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    A Bond movie without a Bond theme, Gunbarrel or good theme music takes away everything that makes it a Bond movie. Without those elements you just have British Bourne Identity. Bland and without it's own identity. (excuse the pun.)

    Are you making fun of SF here???
    No. I'm pointing out, that if you remove what makes a Bond movie a Bond movie. then it stops being a Bond movie. If anything I'm making fun of NSNA.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Murdock wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Now, as @Gustav_Graves has pointed out, we don't need a Barry score, the Bond theme, or the gunbarrel for it to be a proper Bond film, as EON themselves has shown us. However, one does need a decent score. The score from Legrande is a complete disgrace. The absolute worst in the franchise history.

    Um yes you do. A Bond movie without a Bond theme, Gunbarrel or good theme music takes away everything that makes it a Bond movie. Without those elements you just have British Bourne Identity. Bland and without it's own identity. (excuse the pun.)
    I think CR disproved this. Sure, there was a pseudo gunbarrel in a toilet, and the Bond theme at the end of the movie, but I didn't miss either and thought it was more of a Bond film than some others.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    bondjames wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Now, as @Gustav_Graves has pointed out, we don't need a Barry score, the Bond theme, or the gunbarrel for it to be a proper Bond film, as EON themselves has shown us. However, one does need a decent score. The score from Legrande is a complete disgrace. The absolute worst in the franchise history.

    Um yes you do. A Bond movie without a Bond theme, Gunbarrel or good theme music takes away everything that makes it a Bond movie. Without those elements you just have British Bourne Identity. Bland and without it's own identity. (excuse the pun.)
    I think CR disproved this. Sure, there was a pseudo gunbarrel in a toilet, and the Bond theme at the end of the movie, but I didn't miss either and thought it was more of a Bond film than some others.

    CR is acceptable because it's Bond's Beginnings. He's earning it. What was QoS's and Skyfall's excuse? Monty Norman charging too much to use it? Then need to stop being subtle with it and finally use it when Bond is doing something awesome. I'm sick of it being stuck for the credits.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    Murdock wrote: »
    I'm pointing out, that if you remove what makes a Bond movie a Bond movie. then it stops being a Bond movie. If anything I'm making fun of NSNA.
    But SF almost doesn't use the Bond theme, has no gunbarrel opening, and the music is forgettable...
    :-??
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    edited January 2015 Posts: 16,351
    chrisisall wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    I'm pointing out, that if you remove what makes a Bond movie a Bond movie. then it stops being a Bond movie. If anything I'm making fun of NSNA.
    But SF almost doesn't use the Bond theme, has no gunbarrel opening, and the music is forgettable...
    :-??
    I've already said my beef with Skyfall. At least it was a good movie unlike Never Say Never Again.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited January 2015 Posts: 23,883
    Murdock wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Murdock wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Now, as @Gustav_Graves has pointed out, we don't need a Barry score, the Bond theme, or the gunbarrel for it to be a proper Bond film, as EON themselves has shown us. However, one does need a decent score. The score from Legrande is a complete disgrace. The absolute worst in the franchise history.

    Um yes you do. A Bond movie without a Bond theme, Gunbarrel or good theme music takes away everything that makes it a Bond movie. Without those elements you just have British Bourne Identity. Bland and without it's own identity. (excuse the pun.)
    I think CR disproved this. Sure, there was a pseudo gunbarrel in a toilet, and the Bond theme at the end of the movie, but I didn't miss either and thought it was more of a Bond film than some others.

    CR is acceptable because it's Bond's Beginnings. He's earning it. What was QoS's and Skyfall's excuse? Monty Norman charging too much to use it? Then need to stop being subtle with it and finally use it when Bond is doing something awesome. I'm sick of it being stuck for the credits.

    Ok that's fair. You want to hear it more. That's fine. However CR was not less of a Bond film without these elements imo, which means it can be done without the accoutrements - in terms of the NSNA example which we are discussing. They just had a ridiculously bad score for this movie.

    SF as well - the highest grossing 'Bond' movie at that!
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    Okay.
    My main beef with NSNA is that the last half hour is poorly paced and boringly anti-climatic. Give me the speeded up stuff in TB over it any day of the week.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    That's true. The last part really dragged. I think I sped it up when I watched it a couple of weeks back.

    With better casting, better lines for Connery and a kick 'a' score, I think the movie would have been so much better though. These are 'essential' Bond elements that were missing imo. That's where they really messed up, especially against OP.
  • DrunkIrishPoetDrunkIrishPoet The Amber Coast
    Posts: 156
    I always enjoy NSNA in my annual marathon. Connery is great and the bad guys are cool. The big bloke Bond beats in the spa is the same bloke Indiana Jones beats at the flying wing! There's a lot to love.

    If we haven't learned to squint at the iffy bits by now, how are we supposed to enjoy Moonraker and Tomorrow Never Dies ?? Squint a bit, chaps! Close your eyes and think of England!!

    (I never rewatch CR67. That movie is a turd even Orson Wells couldn't save.)
  • Posts: 825
    Well it wasn't that bad. I liked & got the DVD of it with special Features. I like it to Octopussy.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    Now if somebody did that with the whole movie.
  • I think it's more enjoyable than both Octopussy (its competitor at the box office) and Thunderball (with which it shares much of its plot).

    Connery as an older Bond is in top form. Barbara Carrera as Fatima Blush outdoes nearly all of the femme fatales in the EON series (with the exception of Xenia Onatopp). Edward Fox as M and Alec McCowen as Q are a breath of fresh air after the M and Q scenes in the regular series have grown decidedly stale. Klaus Maria Brandauer is an excellent villain.

    I even like most of Michel Legrand's score. The title song works well over the opening sequence; there's a catchy theme for Fatima Blush (fittingly feline in feel); the scene-setting cues (Bahama Island and Une Chanson d'Amour) are effective, as is the big band music accompanying the demise of Jack Petachi. What is missing is Legrand's equivalent of the James Bond theme from the EON series, which should have played under the curiously un-scored motor-bike chase through the streets of Nice to make it more exciting.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    RC7 wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    It's shit.

    Well, that's certainly an elaborate comment :-). Let me show you my ranking of the Bond films and where "NSNA" is in that ranking:

    Top quality films!!!:
    01 --> 9.5/10 --> 'On Her Majesty's Secret Service'
    02 --> 9.3/10 --> 'From Russia With Love'
    03 --> 9.0/10 --> 'Skyfall'
    04 --> 8.7/10 --> 'Casino Royale'
    05 --> 8.3/10 --> 'Thunderball'
    06 --> 8.0/10 --> 'For Your Eyes Only'


    Good films!:
    07 --> 7.6/10 --> 'Doctor No'
    08 --> 7.5/10 --> 'Octopussy'
    09 --> 7.4/10 --> 'The Living Daylights'
    10 --> 7.1/10 --> 'Licence To Kill'
    11 --> 7.0/10 --> 'Goldfinger'


    Average films:
    12 --> 6.7/10 --> 'The World Is Not Enough'
    13 --> 6.4/10 --> 'Quantum Of Solace'
    14 --> 6.2/10 --> 'The Man With The Golden Gun'
    15 --> 6.0/10 --> 'Never Say Never Again' (non-EON)
    16 --> 6.0/10 --> 'Live And Let Die'


    Fun stuff for Bond nerds, but as a standalone film bad and sometimes even groce!:
    17 --> 5.6/10 --> 'The Spy Who Loved Me'
    18 --> 5.3/10 --> 'Diamonds Are Forever'
    19 --> 5.0/10 --> 'Moonraker'
    20 --> 4.8/10 --> 'Tomorrow Never Dies'
    21 --> 4.5/10 --> 'You Only Live Twice'
    22 --> 4.2/10 --> 'GoldenEye'
    23 --> 3.4/10 --> 'A View To A Kill'
    24 --> 2.8/10 --> 'Die Another Day'
    25 --> 1.0/10 --> 'Casino Royale' (non-EON)



    Probably the list will change in the next months. But in all honesty, it never really changed through the years.

    Why do I have NSNA on 16th place? I think it's a pretty good spy flick, in which the pace is perhaps not ultra-fast, but in which the characters get the chance to evolve. I loved Klaus Maria Brandauer as Largo. IMO a very underrated villain....and mainly underrated because he was playing in "that unofficial film".

    That also goes for Fatima Blush, played by Barbara Carrera. Many Bond fans tend to forget that she's the only actor/actress in a Bond film that got full acting recognition for her role during the Golden Globes of 1984. She actually got nominated. And like Javier Bardem in "Skyfall", Barbara was shortlisted for a 'Best Supporting Actress Oscar" in 1984.

    And regarding Carrera's role. Come onnn. She was amazing. It's basically the blueprint for Xenia Onatopp in "GoldenEye". One of the highlights of the film. BUT....forgotten, because her role was in an "unofficial film". I think it's unfair.

    Now as you can see in my ranking I absolutely found "Octopussy" better than "NSNA". But I do think there are at least 7 to 8 official Bond films that were more lacklustre.....especially solely judged as a film.

    This is my opinion off course. But in any case...."NSNA" deserves a bit more praise.

    Nah, it's shit.

    OK :-).

    The fact you rank it above TSWLM is just laughable,

    Well, thank you for your nice remark....

    In my opinion.....TSWLM was a YOLT part 2. Everything had to be big, bigger biggest. Don't get me wrong. As a Bond film TSWLM hit most of its boxes. But judged as a film....I'm less impressed.

    It's like saying Michael Jackson's 'Invincible' is better than 'Thriller'. NSNA hardly outperforms 'Condorman'.
  • Posts: 11,119
    RC7 wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    It's shit.

    Well, that's certainly an elaborate comment :-). Let me show you my ranking of the Bond films and where "NSNA" is in that ranking:

    Top quality films!!!:
    01 --> 9.5/10 --> 'On Her Majesty's Secret Service'
    02 --> 9.3/10 --> 'From Russia With Love'
    03 --> 9.0/10 --> 'Skyfall'
    04 --> 8.7/10 --> 'Casino Royale'
    05 --> 8.3/10 --> 'Thunderball'
    06 --> 8.0/10 --> 'For Your Eyes Only'


    Good films!:
    07 --> 7.6/10 --> 'Doctor No'
    08 --> 7.5/10 --> 'Octopussy'
    09 --> 7.4/10 --> 'The Living Daylights'
    10 --> 7.1/10 --> 'Licence To Kill'
    11 --> 7.0/10 --> 'Goldfinger'


    Average films:
    12 --> 6.7/10 --> 'The World Is Not Enough'
    13 --> 6.4/10 --> 'Quantum Of Solace'
    14 --> 6.2/10 --> 'The Man With The Golden Gun'
    15 --> 6.0/10 --> 'Never Say Never Again' (non-EON)
    16 --> 6.0/10 --> 'Live And Let Die'


    Fun stuff for Bond nerds, but as a standalone film bad and sometimes even groce!:
    17 --> 5.6/10 --> 'The Spy Who Loved Me'
    18 --> 5.3/10 --> 'Diamonds Are Forever'
    19 --> 5.0/10 --> 'Moonraker'
    20 --> 4.8/10 --> 'Tomorrow Never Dies'
    21 --> 4.5/10 --> 'You Only Live Twice'
    22 --> 4.2/10 --> 'GoldenEye'
    23 --> 3.4/10 --> 'A View To A Kill'
    24 --> 2.8/10 --> 'Die Another Day'
    25 --> 1.0/10 --> 'Casino Royale' (non-EON)



    Probably the list will change in the next months. But in all honesty, it never really changed through the years.

    Why do I have NSNA on 16th place? I think it's a pretty good spy flick, in which the pace is perhaps not ultra-fast, but in which the characters get the chance to evolve. I loved Klaus Maria Brandauer as Largo. IMO a very underrated villain....and mainly underrated because he was playing in "that unofficial film".

    That also goes for Fatima Blush, played by Barbara Carrera. Many Bond fans tend to forget that she's the only actor/actress in a Bond film that got full acting recognition for her role during the Golden Globes of 1984. She actually got nominated. And like Javier Bardem in "Skyfall", Barbara was shortlisted for a 'Best Supporting Actress Oscar" in 1984.

    And regarding Carrera's role. Come onnn. She was amazing. It's basically the blueprint for Xenia Onatopp in "GoldenEye". One of the highlights of the film. BUT....forgotten, because her role was in an "unofficial film". I think it's unfair.

    Now as you can see in my ranking I absolutely found "Octopussy" better than "NSNA". But I do think there are at least 7 to 8 official Bond films that were more lacklustre.....especially solely judged as a film.

    This is my opinion off course. But in any case...."NSNA" deserves a bit more praise.

    Nah, it's shit.

    OK :-).

    The fact you rank it above TSWLM is just laughable,

    Well, thank you for your nice remark....

    In my opinion.....TSWLM was a YOLT part 2. Everything had to be big, bigger biggest. Don't get me wrong. As a Bond film TSWLM hit most of its boxes. But judged as a film....I'm less impressed.

    It's like saying Michael Jackson's 'Invincible' is better than 'Thriller'. NSNA hardly outperforms 'Condorman'.

    For you maybe. And I respect your opinion. My opinion is different. Also, don't forget this is a mild appreciation topic for NSNA.

    TSWLM is a good Bond film by the elements. But IMO it lacks as a realistic spy thriller. Wunderful that they build the 007 stage to house this insanely big tanker set. But here it shows that TSWLM was merely about form, not contents

    The aspect of "the ridiculous" was also one of the reasons Sean Connery start feeling increasingly uncomfortable about the direction of the films. And that started already already during the script brainstorm sessions on "Goldfinger", in which Connery's remarks/worries were more or less ignored.

    In all honesty? I truly believe FYEO was Moore's best film with the cold war aspects of OP as a 2nd favourite and TMWTGG the Moore film with the most memorable villain. TSWLM really is my 5th favourite Moore film.

    And NSNA? I just like it way more than, let's say, AVTAK, YOLT, GE and DAD.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    TSWLM isn't supposed to be a realistic spy thriller, though. It never sells itself as such and neither do 99% of the other Bond flicks.

    NSNA is not a realistic spy thriller either. I genuinely cannot fathom how someone would deem it superior to one of the definitive Bond movies.
  • Posts: 11,189
    I personally can't forgive NSNA for the genuinely crummy feeling of the production.
  • edited January 2015 Posts: 11,119
    RC7 wrote: »
    TSWLM isn't supposed to be a realistic spy thriller, though. It never sells itself as such and neither do 99% of the other Bond flicks.

    NSNA is not a realistic spy thriller either. I genuinely cannot fathom how someone would deem it superior to one of the definitive Bond movies.


    But off course @RC7! I fully agree. Hence why I do like other Bond films more than TSWLM. I think movies like FRWL, CR, OHMSS and SF have at least more of that spy realism than TSWLM.

    In all honesty, this is also a matter of personal taste, which is also very subjective . And it would be nice if you can at least respect my taste without agreeing or understanding it. Ok? It is what it is. Deal with my "insane taste" or don't discuss it :-).

    By the way....I haven't at least heard ONE thing that you DID like about NSNA. Many people in here can do that, because it's an appreciation topic. I at least explain why I'm not so fond of TSWLM. But you simply "hate" NSNA.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    NSNA is a good movie damaged by the score, casting choices and dialogue. Cinematography & some of the action is very good, as is Connery & Carrera.

    TSWLM is one of the great Bond films imo. because it has a perfect blend of all elements that make Bond great. There is a suitable spy element during Bond's time in Egypt. It's not drawn out, but it's certainly there. It also has all the other elements associated with Bond (stunts, babes, cars, explosions, great sets, great villains, great dialogue, music - in some areas, etc.).
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    edited January 2015 Posts: 24,159
    NSNA is a wannabe, couldabe and shouldabe. But far too many mistakes were made. Firstly, it's not a particularly beautiful looking film. Compared to OP, NSNA fails to create a world which I want to visit. Except for some of the more sunny locations, like Nassau and France, the locations in this film are overall unappealing.

    Then there's the action. NSNA at times feels like a cheap TV film from the 70s. I have seen similar action scenes in those two Reb Brown Captain America TV films. Add to that a gruesomely outdated score, and NSNA has nothing of that two-minutes-into-the-future thing going for it that the EONs had and still have. Especially the "grand finale" is a total let-down, with underwater mayhem that loses me completely. At least in TB, I get a sense of what's going on.

    BUT, despite its many flaws in terms of cinematography, NSNA has some interesting acting performances to offer, most notably from Connery himself. He's only half the Bond he was in FRWL, but I find him amusing nonetheless. Brandauer is a treat. And Basinger was my childhood movie crush so I certainly don't mind her. Valerie Leon and Barabara Carrera deliver the goods too.

    Returning to my two-minutes-into-the-future comment, I will admit that the videogame scene, while old before the 80s were over, always has me focused. That, however, cannot compensate for Dr. Evil's sharks with whatever it is they have on them. And the fact that Bond's ultimate tie-breaking clue is an ugly jewel Largo gave his mistress to remember where he hid some nukes, annoys me.

    Overall, NSNA is a tough film to process. I'm always giving it a fair chance, even though I blame Kevin McClory and his court fetish for A) the rapidly deteriorating health of Ian Fleming, B) some of the delays the EON Bonds have suffered in the past and C) the absence of Spectre / Blofeld in the post-Connery Bonds. Whenever I rewatch the entire series, I include NSNA. Whenever I listen to the scores, I select NSNA for my playlist as well. Is it a bad film? By now I must have seen it often enough to have developed some marginal appreciation for it but I will say this; I rank it lower than DAD and even CR67 because the latter, at the very least, has a GREAT score, nice sets and none of that "let's go fifty rounds against EON" tough-guy attitude.

    My biggest complaint is still this: this film was years in the making, had a big enough budget and a producer ready to stir things up and start his own Bond franchise. Yet all those years of preparation, all that money and all those good intention produced "just" this film? EON produces films that are ten times as good, in one tenth of the time McClory spent on the whole thing. And so as a Bond fan, I'm glad that audiences, against all odds, gave Moore-o-pussy several millions of dollars more credit than Never Say Connery Again. McClory spent half his life trying to build a tower that would cast a large shadow over EON; but the only thing he ever finished was a tool shed that only remains standing through the goodwill of people like us. This is a summary of the man's career.

    Do I dislike McClory? One might say I do. Even if we can blame Fleming for having shared a couple of drink too many with a couple of guys and taking material the other two had worked on without even giving them some credit, there was never any reason why McClory should have sought to destroy the legacy of Harry and Cubby. That's like going after Peter Jackson because Tolkien had looked funny at your grandmother once.
  • MooseWithFleasMooseWithFleas Philadelphia
    edited January 2015 Posts: 3,368
    As I grow older and watch it more, there are things I enjoy about NSNA. I've always liked Rowan Atkinson as he fits with the more campy/humorous tone of the film. Fatima works though she is no Fiona Volpe.

    I still have a huge issue with the action which seems so small compared to EON films. The 2nd Unit teams for EON has always been an underrated backbone to the franchise as they are mostly responsible for the tremendous action on the screen. IMO, it is very evident through the health club fight and the horse scene near the end. The best of the action is the motorcycle chase which still seems small.

    Now if they substituted story over action that is one thing, but the story is equally small for me here. They take the grandiose SPECTRE and water it down here and all of the great elements of TB's story all translate poorly. Any changes to the story they made were significant downgrades in my opinion. While Fatima is a definite plus, even her character seems sloppily executed.

    My favorite Bond vlogger summarizes my opinion well at 11:14 in his OP vs NSNA review:


  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    That guy's pretty funny.
  • edited January 2015 Posts: 1,596
    RC7 wrote: »
    The fact you rank it above TSWLM is just laughable,

    I agree that TSWLM is a better film, but he's entitled to his opinion. Quit being such an elitist.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    RC7 wrote: »
    The fact you rank it above TSWLM is just laughable,

    I agree that TSWLM is a better film, but he's entitled to his opinion. Quit being such an elitist.

    He knows I love him really. Calm yourself.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,789
    My inner elitist laughs at all of you without the sense to agree with my every comment! Ha!
  • RC7 wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    The fact you rank it above TSWLM is just laughable,

    I agree that TSWLM is a better film, but he's entitled to his opinion. Quit being such an elitist.

    He knows I love him really. Calm yourself.

    Oh my mistake then. Didn't know you chaps were well acquainted!
  • DrunkIrishPoetDrunkIrishPoet The Amber Coast
    Posts: 156
    Thank you, @birdleson! That was just what that movie needed!!
  • Posts: 34
    NSNA for me is a better performance by SC than DAF, he looked fitter and seemed to be enjoying himself more. But that's about it for me, as a 13 year old at the time it was all about OP for me but NSNA has aged quite well and I appreciate it now more than I did back then.
  • tony wrote: »
    NSNA for me is a better performance by SC than DAF, he looked fitter and seemed to be enjoying himself more. But that's about it for me, as a 13 year old at the time it was all about OP for me but NSNA has aged quite well and I appreciate it now more than I did back then.

    I think Connery is definitely in better shape in NSNA but I vastly prefer his performance in DAF. He's having the time of his life in that film.

  • Posts: 1,009
    About Connery's perfomance: I said it on another thread, but I feel that him breaking the 4th wall to wink at the camera was a nice way to bid farewell to the fans.
  • edited January 2015 Posts: 1,596
    That doesn't really have anything to do with his performance, but I didn't mind the wink.
Sign In or Register to comment.