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
No, I didn't. I thought you meant TOP 3.
But what does "overrated" mean? That 100 people do not express their opinion correctly in a poll like this? I mean I think it is fair to find a film "overrated", if their is only one person to judge a film or a small group of people judging a film.
Otherwise, I would say, I personally like a particular film less than the majority of people. Or my subjective view on the film is less positive than the overall view of the whole fandom.
However, I'd say you can use these terms on a few occasions.
For instance, if a film is lauded by either critics, public or both and you have fair arguments why it might not be as good as the majority apparently thinks it is I'm sure you can use the term 'overrated'.
Same goes for 'underrated' if you can point out several fine aspects in a film that is usually derided.
Again, what counts for TLD, also counts for SF.....and all other Bond films: What counts is the average overall 'total package'. That is never over- or underrated, That is exactly what it is: 5th place. So it means 'on average' that SF is seen as the 5th Best Bond Film...perhaps tied with TLD. But even then SF narrowly wins. And the gap with the 7th placed film DN is considerable.
I can understand though that your individual ranking does not represent the average ranking. Hence your "mehhh"-feeling. And that it makes sense that you feel this film is 'overrated' since you place it much lower on your list.
My young self may disliked the lack of action and pacing of FRWL and think it is "overrated" (and rarely you will find reviews on youtube that say that) but as an adult, it is one of if not the most refined Bond films ever made.
Notes:
- Based on the 2012-2015 rankings (middle column)
* No-one ranked AVTAK and DAD 1st (highest was 5th and 4th respectively)
* No-one ranked DN-GF, TSWLM, TLD, CR last. FRWL, GF, TSWLM did not have 2nd last placings either
Notes:
- "Websites" is a combination of non-Bond forums, reddit, youtube, entertainment websites, blogs and podcasts. It includes ALL rankings, including those done before [insert Craig movie]. Therefore, numbers for CR to SP have been adjusted
- I may have to redo the tier colour coding.
- The list is an addition of all ranks, 24 pts for 1st and 1 pt for 24th
- AJB has always viewed LTK much higher than elsewhere, likely due to the small sample size and a few members there ranking LTK as no 1
Great, Great work! Thank you!
@BondJasonBond006
Thanks
And I might add that the reason why CR is above FRWL is because most of CR's rankings (75%) are between 1st and 5th and 83% of FRWL's ranks are 1st to 8th. If you add up the 1st and 2nd placings they are the same
I won't hijack this thread any longer, I will place some other findings on the ranking thread
Could it be that....slowly.....the oldest Bond classics are loosing ground in rankings of Best Bond films? That the older they get through the years -and they are old, more than 50 years- new generations start loosing interest in even the best Bond films from the 1960's? I am talking about for instance FRWL vs. CR
Only TLD GE CR and SF are "crashing" into the rankings between the old ones (Connery Laz Moore)
1) The newer generation doesn't appreciate older films (worse pacing and picture/sound quality)
2) Assuming the poll reflects the demographic doing the rankings, the forum is skewed towards younger members who may prefer newer films
3) Older members (and I'm generalising here) may not be inclined to rank the films, and would rather put into words their thoughts
Well, that's a valid point. But wouldn't you say that in 25 years from now.....slowly films like OHMSS, GF and FRWL will sink in ranking games? Due to one very 'plastic' argument: age? I mean, even 'we' will die eventually :-).
Nope, a classic stays a classic, one or two more decades will not change it, everything that has survived 20 years as a classic will stay that way.
CR and SF are not there yet but it is relatively save to say CR will remain a classic no matter its age.
For you that is. But I think you don't get my point. Even young Bond fans sometimes find 'the old ones' too slowly paced. I mean, same goes with a classics like 'Gone With The Wind' (1938) or 'A Trip to the Moon' (1902). Not many people in the office I know that have actually fully seen these films. There comes a time when even the best Bond films simply become too old too handle. Then for you and me it'll stay a classic, but for the unborn Bond fans of the future that's a different thing.
DN to TB represent such a string of amazing and iconic filmmaking that very few later movies stand up to them, especially as Bond entered self parody stage. DN and FRWL especially are just near-perfect films, and you don't have that often in Bond. Add in GF's popularity and TB's status as the first big blockbuster Bond, and I don't think these films will be going anywhere. If anything, over time I hope TB gets more love than it usually does, as I think it is a perfect mate to Young's first two and it bemuses me why it isn't right up there with FRWL and GF in the rankings. Though it is refreshing to see it around the 9th, 10th or 11th spots at the very least in those above rankings from other Bond sites.
CR simply represents an anomaly, a time when a modern Bond for the first time repeated the same perfect filmmaking we hadn't seen since the Terence Young films. All elements came together to work magic, bringing a modern identity to Bond that felt worthy of applause and that changed things and expectations thereafter. It's almost unfair CR is so good, because it makes so much that comes after or before it look inferior in comparison. Over time it's consistently proven 10 years on that it is worthy of being ranked with or ahead of the best of Bond. And for someone like me to rank CR higher than Connery's best films says something about just what kind of film it is. It's the amazing film it deserves to be, considering the context it is placed in historically as the Bond to begin them all that made everything we have now possible way back in 1953.
@Birdleson. Surely not a burden!
Bond Forum is the sum of MI6, AJB, CBn
The general public, eg my sister I am struggling to get to watch any Bond film, let alone pre-Craig (to her credit she has watched most if not all when she was young and easily influenced)
"Oh my god, when's this movie going to do something interesting?! It's, like, twenty minutes in and all we've seen is some blonde weirdo walk through a garden, a weirder guy play chess and another guy with a cat talk about fish. You were, like, totally joking when you called this the best Bond film ever, right? Can anyone say 'snore,' right? BORING ALERT."
I would kill them all. On principle.
OMFG u r so rite, wat a boring film, like, nothing happens and there is this weird old lesbo scene #notcool
tbh when I was younger I didn't particularly like the chess scene but now everything is a joy to watch. Young's direction in DN and FRWL is meticulous and each character is brought to life without being over the top and over-acted
All three are now big fans and all of them find Dalton to be the best Bond so far. And I did not influence them.
OHMSS has become the No 1 for two of them, the third ranks it in his top 5.
All three love FRWL and TB!
GE and CR as well.
Moore didn't do much for them except FYEO and OP.
QOS and SF didn't fare too well with them surprisingly. One was to dumb and action-loaded, the other one boring and way too soap-opera like.
Again, I didn't tell them my preferences.
Next Monday, Halloween, I am hosting, as usual, a Halloween party, this time for adults only. All three youngsters will be there and it will be a James Bond Party. My brothers-in-arms will join as well.
I have already convinced another work-colleague to watch some Bond films with me next year. He has only seen SF and found it meh, sorry, it's the truth.
Usually I don't want to educate people on things I love, I don't do it with Star Trek and with Batman only to some extend. But Bond is different. It features films from the last 6 decades which is incredible if you think of it.
How young?
But most likely they will live longer than we do :-).
I agree entirely, @w2bond. Everything in DN and FRWL is essential, nothing wasted. The characters are meticulously developed with true genius and the films just get to the business of being good without any other distractions. It's rare to have Bond films that hit the mark with every single scene until the end, but that's what the Connery era delivers under Young's direction. Add in Adam's sets, Barry's music and Maibaum's scripts and you've got a combination that can't ever be matched. I hate to throw around the word "masterpiece," but that's what those films are.
Yes sorry should have mentioned.
18, 22, 27