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
The part that normally bores me in OP is when Bond is at Octopussy's palace and also the finale (before the plane ride, which is a thrill). I also can't stand the jungle sequence.
You didnt like Berlin and Kamal Khan ??
Lucky i like u so much @ClarkDevlin ;)
I will let @benny sort you out tomorrow hahaha .
Silly Dr..
The closest way I could compare to how I feel with TSWLM/MR and OP/AVTAK is that: Imagine if you're eating Spaghetti made delicious by the spices dropped on and around it, whether it's the salt, pepper or the sauce, whatever. That's the first group. The latter is without all these ingredients but the Spaghetti alone. Without a spice. Just a deserted Spaghetti and nothing else.
Throwing me under the bus, eh, @barryt007, old boy? :))
He will find you either old chap....best to make it as painless as possible hahaha
I've always put that down to his lack of visual flair, and perhaps budget constraints. There's no doubt that the MR/TSWLM era has a lot more finesse in the direction of the action sequences. I also think Hamilton did a much better job with the large set pieces in LALD/TMWTGG (I love the long lensed approach to the boat chase in the former and the car chase in the latter).
It s because it s the best. Honourable mention to TSWLM, which is the most iconic and also very enjoyable.
It works better than most non-Barry scores from the '80s onward. I can listen to this and reimagine certain scenes in the film, which is important. Can't say the same with Kamen, Serra, much of Arnold and about any of Newman.
The least engaged I am would probably happen in a Moore or Brosnan film, as less interest is there for me in those respective areas. I don't buy the product, so I'm harder to sell on it, in a way. Thankfully the Moore films at the very least have the beautiful location work that really make them interesting to watch besides what I perceive as weaknesses, so I don't think I could ever classify any of them as truly boring. Boredom could sink in with TND or TWINE because I don't buy into the approach or feeling of the era, whereas DAD would just have me expressing disappointment.
Three factors would really make me lose interest in a Bond film would be Bond's character and how he's written and used most majorly, the use of the villain and supporting cast, and ultimately how all the film and Bond elements come together in the end to tell the story. Not having a Bond I'm into is the biggest hurdle for a film to cross, as he is the reason I watch the films and can be the difference between me being forgiving of the flaws I see or being frustrated with a film because a good Bond isn't there to distract me from those flaws.
Everything else is secondary to Bond's presentation, and I think that's why I can dig films that the majority don't seem to be mad about, like TB, LTK, QoS or SP, because the Bond fully engages me and allows me to forgive other flaws I see, with varying degrees. It's also the same reason why films people may love, like GF in a major example, have become harder for me to get into, because on top of other issues in the film there isn't a Bond I support through the journey.
So of all the Bond films I've loved in the past, the one I'd say has me least interested at this time is GF, whereas ones I've never "got" until recently like DAF are only going up in my mind. Crazy, really.
Great post. I share a lot of these feelings, especially about the films others don't like as much. LTK and QoS are perfect examples of that because I'm focused mostly on the actor playing Bond and not so much the (fill in the complaint).
Another point above I agree with is the characters and not caring for them and that's how I feel with FYEO. I can't think of any aside from Colombo that are engaging. Kristatos and Melina are pretty one-dimensional, Loque and Kriegler are Red Grant variations, Bibi has no place in the film, Ferrara and the Countess are colorless sacrificial lambs, etc. Then I look at an undeveloped character like Jacoba Brink who has 2-3 scenes and could be potentially interesting and nothing is done with her.
Some would argue they are just more realistic, but I wish they had more 'camp' or exaggeration to them. I like my Bond characters with a bit of flavour.
Interestingly, I find that Roger Moore dials back his super screen charisma in this film too, and I wonder if it's so as to fit in with the surroundings. He's back to what he does best in the next outing.
I think a Barry scored FYEO would've lifted this rather dull Bond movie and given it an extra dynamic that, for me, feels solely lacking.