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
Having an opinion in finding the shower scene inappropriate, ok that's fine, but there's no excuse to make those inane comments and then to actually have the gall to suggest the scene would have been cut had the Saville scandal came to light earlier. That goes beyond idiotic.
Excellent "two cents", Brady.
I wonder if people who take "What makes you think this is my first time?" literally, and people who take "waste of good Scotch" literally are the same or different people. Since when does every line uttered in a movie - or in real life, for that matter - simply mean what is literally being said?
Bond uses those lines for roughly the same purpose - after roughly the same goal by Silva (just by very different means, obviously), and both times those lines work as intended. In both cases Silva asks him a question (both literally and figuratively) - and Bond answers. And no, he's not saying he's gay or bi, or that he doesn't give a damn about Severine's death. Bond is being clever and effective, and achieves the goal he attempted by saying those lines.
Sooooo... GE. Oh... btw, when Bond tells the baddies to kill Natalya and that she means nothing to him, he actually means it? :O What a cold, heartless... eeeeh. 8-| Right then. But speaking of dialogue, there were some great lines in GE... and some not so great. Ah well. I look at it very differently now, in so many ways. All in all, I certainly don't enjoy it as much now than I did in 1995, but it wasn't bad now, either. The music didn't bother me. I've never listened to it on its own, but mostly it was ok by me in the movie, at times quite interesting... and at other times just... just not good.
I'll follow with the next 2 in near future, haven't seen them in awhile, either.
Which did you like better?
I love both, but 'Licence to Kill' slightly more..
For me, it's TLD (slightly) but I am certainly a Dalton fan.
While I think GE was Brosnan's best Bond film, it could have been still better with Dalton and thus probably Dalton's best entry.
I haven't seen Licence To Kill in two years, and consequently the movie flew by. I think this is the best, and most competently directed Bond film of John Glen.
I was surprised how good LTK looked. Granted it's not up there with the rest of the other cinematographic delights that the Bond movies have to offer us, but on my Ultimate Edition DVD the colours have never looked sharper and more vibrant. I forgot to mention it on my GoldenEye "review", but GoldenEye looks like closer to LTK chronically than Tomorrow Never Dies, and seeing both GE and LTK so close together, has really confused the issue; if I didn't know which one came out first, I'd be hard tried to split them apart. (well 1989 computer technology and 90's hair aside...)
This has everything one can expect from a Bond film, especially a great cast, I particularly like the heavies in this one, and inventive action - the escape from WaveKrest and the tanker climax are up there with the best Bondian action sequences.
Timothy Dalton once again excelling as Bond, although this time we don’t see Fleming’s consummate professional, but a more animalistic interpretation, where Bond loses his sheen of sophistication, exposing the blunt instrument beneath. For most of the movie Bond fights with his heart, the personal nature of the story clouding his judgement, making his aim sloppy. It is only once Bond learns about the stinger missiles is he finally able to treat his vendetta as a mission, and he finally gains control of the situation. Superb again, Mr Dalton, superb.
Once again I was impressed with Robert Davi as Franz Sanchez; he has such a twisted view of things; loyalty over money, and yet Sanchez is capable of some truly harrowing feats. I wonder if the writers looked back to Ian Fleming's The Man With The Golden Gun - there are some subtle similarities between the characters of Franz Sanchez and Francisco Scaramanga, especially the whiff of homosexuality - notice Sanchez's hugs and affection to Dario last a little too long, and Sanchez may be attracted to Bond. Or maybe I'm looking in to it too much.
I heard criticism from some quarters, that Bond going rogue, and have him set against a drug dealer was very eighties, and clichéd, but with the passage of time, the intrinsic rewatchabilty of LTK make this a somewhat timeless piece. Also, I find Bond going rogue to be in line with Fleming's version of the character; note when Bond discovers that Dr Shatterhand is in fact Blofeld, he forgets his mission, and swears vengeance. If the stakes are high enough for Bond, I believe he would go rogue, particularly as Delia got murdered - who knows what latent memories they have stirred up in Bond's mind?
All in all I was rather chuffed to see Licence To Kill. But, as always, I got rather emotional over the end credits - just two films with the fantastic Mr Dalton.
P.s on a side note, the jeweller for this film was by Sheila Goldfinger...
Great review @royale65 but I'm afraid that this theory is a bit of a pet peeve of mine. Eliminating Dr. Shatterhand was a part of Bond's mission as Tiger wanted him gone because the Garden of Death had become a national embarrassment. He doesn't quit his job and betray his country to go on a killing spree.
Upon revisiting these films after such a long break has been great, and it has made me realize why I still think of them so fondly after seeing them countless times. Both DN and FRWL compliment each other well, and are in many ways parts of a two-story arc, where Bond's fight against SPECTRE continues as the organization in part plan to strike revenge against 007 for killing Dr. No.
Dr. No
Though it was only the first film in what many hoped to be a fruitful franchise (who knew it would still be around 50 years later!), DN is absolutely classic. In this film there is a great story that feels in part realistic (though the events surrounding it are fantastically escapist), great Bond girls, a spectacular villain (though brief), amazing settings, some of the best allies in the characters of Quarrel, Felix, Puss Feller, and of course, the Bond of all Bonds: Sir Sean Connery. These two films alone show clearly why he is regarded by the majority (including me) as the classical, quintessential James Bond. His greatest moments are in the subtleties of his performances, with some of his most immaculate acting captured in these two films alone. The little winks he gives, the twinkles in his eyes and how he effortlessly commands a room. His cold and vengeful stares that transmit his anger at the death of a comrade, and his sharp and watchful gazes that express Bond's alertness as he avoids danger or bug-proofs his room. His smirks, grins and magnetism that feels believable when all the women in his proximity swoon. Without even speaking he gives some of the greatest performances of the series, performances that not only show off his talents as an actor but that also tell us so much about Bond.
We see all of Bond's intelligence, danger, watchfulness, resourcefulness, care and more in Sean's masterful portrayal. I love seeing Bond check his rooms for bugs, out-smarting SPECTRE and avoiding surveillance, or when he sets a trap for enemies (as he does with Dent in DN). They show the brilliance of Bond and his amazingly tactical mind, something we don't see enough of in other areas of the series. The films at this time captured the events straight-faced and didn't hold back, showing us both the delights and devastations of leading the lifestyle of a spy as Bond has chosen to do. In the two films we also see some of the greatest villains to cross paths with Bond that remain the best of the best today. Though we only see him in the last half hour of the film, Dr. No is a haunting and dangerous presence from the very moment we see his name printed largely on Mary Trueblood's files. The subsequent legends and warnings about him and his island, Crab Key, as the duration of the film goes on build him up to an almost mythic status; much in the way you would present a villain in a slasher film, à la John Carpenter. His voice and the terror he holds over those he employs grips us until we finally see him appear in full form on our screens. And though this appearance is a brief one, Dr. No's arrogance, quotable dialogues, interesting repartee with Bond, resounding voice and strange disfigurement make him one of the best in the era, a better villain than the majority in the series and masterfully played by Joseph Wiseman. Team all this with the enchanting Miss Ryder, the spectacular Quarrel*, lively locations and more, and this film lives up to its classic reputation in spades.
*I still don't have the faintest idea after re-watching this film why some find Bond's behavior towards Quarrel (especially the "fetch my shoes" line) racist. Bond has a great respect and care for the man, and I honestly don't sense one second of cruelty between the men in this film. Bond cares so much for Quarrel that when Dr. No offers him a position in SPECTRE he comments that his first order of business would be to find the man who killed Strangways and Quarrel. Again, I fail to see any racism or cruelty at all in this film.
From Russia With Love
Just as with DN, this film is another classic in the franchise. Right from the very beginning we are gripped with a thrilling paranoia filled cat and mouse game, especially if you watch the film for the first time and think that Bond has just been killed by Grant! The titles that follow the amazing opening sequence are amongst the coolest in cinema. In this film we get the amazing Kerim (one of my favorite allies), the lovely (yet naive) Tatiana, amazing locations, brutal action, another masterful Connery performance and one of the greatest Cold War espionage plots out there on film. Everything from SPECTRE's plot and Blofeld's comparison of japanese fighting fish to their plan to play Russia and Britain off of each other is brilliant, as are the villains of Kronsteen, Klebb and Grant. Kronsteen is so wonderfully arrogant, Klebb a maliciously cold yet human character that still feels fear, and of course there is the brilliant Grant played magnificently by Shaw.
The magic of Shaw's performance is in the subtlety of its presentation. Grant isn't a vocal character, and is instead more a man of action, so most of what we see of him are through shots showing him carefully watching the situation or standing dangerously in the shadows, a looming specter over Bond's shoulder the whole way through. Grant is an evil and deviously brilliant constant to the end, causing mayhem against the Russians and Brits, masterfully playing them against each other. In the end, it is his own unpreparedness that leads to his end, not accounting fully for Bond's strong mind and resourcefulness, as was Kronsteen's fatal flaw. His slip ups cost him not only his cover but also his life during one of the most brutal fight scenes the franchise has ever seen, an absolutely cracking sequence for its time, featuring Bond and Grant going at it to the bitter death in the darkness of a train compartment. Fist-cuffs have hardly ever become more classic.
Once again, Sean dazzles in everything from his love/flirting scenes to his cold and brutal fights and deliveries. He shows everything from Bond's charm, intelligence and dangerous capabilities effortlessly, giving us an amazing performance that earns its classic reputation. His performances present myriads of Bond's personality, giving him so many layers and endless depth as a character. Many argue that Sean's Bond was a care-free and emotionless character, but just these two films prove them dead wrong. DN features Bond's anger over Quarrel's death (as mentioned previously) and in this film we get one of the greatest scenes in the franchise when Bond finds Kerim dead. In just his expressions alone, Sean masterfully conveys Bond's pain, anger and thirst for revenge he holds against whoever killed the man who had grown to be a great friend of his (how do you not love Kerim, anyway?!). When he finally uncovers the plot SPECTRE has hatched against him and MI6 near the end of the film, his fight with Grant becomes not only a fight for survival, but also a chance to avenge Kerim. I see Bond's cold delivery of the mocking line, "old man" as a way of telling Grant, "that was for Kerim."
Oh, what films these are; I really could go on like this for hours on end. What isn't there to like here? You could endlessly examine Bond as the man, marvel at the locations, revel in the brilliant dialogue and through all this, continuously re-explore two of Bond's finest cinematic adventures. It is films like DN and FRWL that lucidly show the James Bond franchise can be more than just action movie entertainment, but also classic, straight-faced, and smart character studies that serve as unforgettably thrilling espionage journeys that stay with you long after credits roll.
Thanks @pachzo
it's a bit of a contentious issue, but if the situation warrants it, if the stake were high enough for Bond emotionally, then I do believe he would go rogue.
Granted, that was his mission in You Only Live Twice, but as Fleming said in the book;
"He (Bond) was in cold control of himself. This was now a private matter. It had nothing to do with Tiger or Japan. It had nothing to do with Magic 44. It was an ancient feud...
...To reveal the true identity of Doctor Shatterhand would be to put the whole case into official channels. The Japanese Secret Service and the CIA would swarm down to Fukuoka. Blofeld and Irma Bunt would be arrested. James Bond personal prey would be snatched from him. There would be no revenge!".
Thus my interpretation of this scene, and of LTK, is one of personal revenge.
Then again, we all interpret the Bond universe in different ways. :-)
Yay for more TWINE love. It's my second favorite Brosnan flick. :-bd
My favourite is still TND (by a tiny bit), but TWINE, for me, has roughly equal status with GE now... making it my (co)second favourite as well now. :)>-
Back when I was a young lad of maybe 10 or 11 I would watch the heck out of TND and TWINE consecutively, I still don't know which one I've watched the most. :)
Sounds familiar. James Bond will be back... the next time my wife is out of town.
Idea!! How about some enterprising manufacturer create scale display models of some of the great Bond sets, for us Bond fans to display in our basements or nearest handy room.
It's a nice idea, but don't think my wife would favor that too much..
It's back to the James Bond theme park idea though isn't it. I don't think a simple home would really be the place to accomodate such a thing ? Even if they are small or miniature scale
Eg, I am alway tempted to pause and freeze the volcano lair scenes in YOLT, so as to get a better sense of the layout and how everything connects, but I get so drawn into the movie, that I can't bring myself to pause.
I promise to do so later, but that later never comes, as I continue to simply get drawn into watching the movie again.
But having the sets rendered digitally to be explored at one's leisure would be a lot of fun.
Bond fans would snap such a product up, I am sure.
Both feature Bond ambushed by a gun-wielding assassin who holds Bond at gunpoint for an extended period while engaging in a textbook case of evil gloating (not terribly uncommon, I know, but keep going). In both cases, the plan is to make Bond and the current object of his affections look like the victims of a murder-suicide. In both cases, the villain promises to do something that will make Bond not look at all like he committed suicide (Kaufman will shoot him from several feet away, and Grant will shoot him multiple times). In both cases, the villain is distracted by Bond's gadget (his car, or at least a phone call about it and his briefcase's gold coins), at which point Bond is able to trick the villain into using another booby-trapped gadget to surprise and overtake him. He kills both, although Grant's is proceeded by the legendary train fight.
Of course, Grant's scene works better because it's not played for laughs and Connery and Shaw are both firing on all cylinders. The Kaufman scene is good in its own, though, and may just be Brosnan's finest moment as Bond.
Mine would, as long as I managed to convince her it's really a romper room for the kitty cats.