Bond Movie A vs. Bond Movie B (Dr. No vs. SkyFall)

Agent005

YOLT

Samuel001

Moonraker. It's fun and has a laugh. Unlike the other film that tries to be something and flat out fails.

Dr_Metz

YOLT had Bond saying he's never been to Japan, when he said he went with M in FRWL, but MR has Jaws falling in love, and the plot makes absolutely no sense. Both have their bad moments, but the giant battle in the volcano at the end of YOLT is great fun, and the best action scene out of both films. I also like Little Nellie more than the gadgets used in MR. My vote goes to YOLT.

Zekidk

Lewis Gilbert vs Lewis Gilbert? Tough one. Love them both. I'll pick YOLT.

DaltonCraig007

MR hands down.

SJK91

You Only Live Twice for me, by quite a bit. Though Sean Connery clearly does not give a damn I've always preferred him to Roger Moore. There are also some neat classic elements in YOLT. It was the weakest film of the 60s, but I still enjoy the film.

Moonraker on the other hand has an absolutely brilliant opening half, but loses just about everything after that cable car fight.

Baltimore_007

You Only Live Twice had the good sense to prevent from actually putting James Bond into outer space although Connery was more than happy to take off in his suit before Blofeld caught him out at the last minute, not so with Moore as for some reason he and Goodhead decide to sneak in a shuttle and blast off into space for no apparent reason whatsoever, i.e they were totally unaware of any Drax spacestation in orbit at the time or even that Drax himself was also on a space mission in another shuttle, they were not aware of these relevant factors and just seemed to blast off in a shuttle for no reason except to put Bond into space, but all said we can easily overlook these minor issues as it's Moore, it's Moonraker and everything that occurs on screen can simply be taken with a pinch of salt, at least in this particular 007 caper

For all it's asinine stupidity, and all round nonsense Moonraker is a really fun adventure, it's a bit of a guilty pleasure even and it's a better Bond film than Connerys You Only Live Twice, Bond spends the entire duration in one country, 'turns Japanese', 'trains to become a Ninja', was that really necessary? and just to finish it's arguably one to forget for Mr Connery along with his Diamonds swansong. Moonraker wins this particular battle, I mean there's just so much to get involved in. It's one thing that You Only Live Twice lacks the most

DoubleOhhSeven

Moonraker gets my vote. Atleast Roger Moore wanted to be there. I put these 2 films along with DAD in a poll and MR won with 50% of the votes. Im happy to see it get alittle love. It's not as bad as people say.

PrinceKamalKhan

Zekidk said:
Lewis Gilbert vs Lewis Gilbert? Tough one. Love them both.

Exactly. Both in my top 7. My two favorite Bond films as a child. I'm picking MR since Moore seems to be having more fun in his 4th turn at the role than Connery does in his 5th. Plus, I like how MR introduces the primary villain and the heroine early on in the pic and that they both play major roles throughout the film.

00Beast

You Only Live Twice

Even though Sean Connery's performance is clearly terrible and dull, I do have a soft spot for YOLT. The plot is the first Bond movie to do the old "pit two countries against each other". I enjoy watching SPECTRE sit back and let the UK and USSR duke it out over the table! The action is more enjoyable in YOLT, given such scenes like Bond's fight with Osato's driver, the Kobe Docks battle, and of course, the epic showdown in the volcano. Whether a prepostrous location or not, it's great entertainment! However, one thing that YOLT does not have is good villains. Ugh, they're terrible! Osato and Brandt are absolutely worthless, and Hans doesn't get enough screen time to make a huge difference. As for Blofeld, he doesn't have any importance in the movie until there is at least 30 minutes left, so he's the only good villain in the movie for the last half hour. At least Moonraker has Hugo Drax in the entire movie, and Chang is more memorable than Brandt and Osato combined. Also, MR out-does YOLT in the score by a long shot. I really don't care for YOLT's score, it's very annoying. Anyway, I do prefer YOLT over MR, because its action and plot are better, which are two major factors in my opinion.

Moonraker- it seems more energetic and lively than YOLT but both are good films

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7

Dr_Metz said:
Goldfinger by far. Casino Royale is an abomination, and hopefully will be forgotten in a decade or so. Goldfinger is a better adaptation of the book as well. I don't remember Bond running through a construction site and breaking into an embassy, with only a slap on the wrist as a punishment in the Casino Royale novel. It's not really that "gritty" as everyone says, is it? Sounds like absolute fantasy to me. Also, 0BradyM0Bondfanatic7, it has the "Best Bond theme"? Are you kidding me? How is the OHMSS theme a lesser theme to Chris Cornell's whiny voice screaming incredibly bland lyrics?

Oh Christ, another shadow...
8-|

Agent007391

YOLT. It's got a better story, no space station scenes, and best of all, Sean Connery. The only thing MR's got over YOLT, Drax's actor, who's far better than Donald Pleasance as Blofeld (Telly Savalas was better).

00Beast

Agent007391 said:
YOLT. It's got a better story, no space station scenes, and best of all, Sean Connery. The only thing MR's got over YOLT, Drax's actor, who's far better than Donald Pleasance as Blofeld (Telly Savalas was better).

Not trying to criticize here, just asking. Did you like Connery's performance? I really thought he was making a clear statement, "I don't want to be here!"

Baltimore_007

Connery had simply had enough by the time of 1967's YOLT, he even resigned from the part of all things during production, only to come back with some 'renewed enthusiasm' when they offered him an astronomical sum of cash to appear again, I would of paid Connery not to have done Bond again, at least after Thunderball, the desire and hunger was evidently in decline. Not so the case with Moore as despite the advancing years, Roger was having a whale of a time and taking in such grand sets as Brazil, Italy and San Francisco and just seemed happy to carry on in the role, until he realized that age was simply against him, up until that point he was happy in the part, something Connery evidently wasn't towards the end

Agent007391

00Beast said:

Agent007391 said:
YOLT. It's got a better story, no space station scenes, and best of all, Sean Connery. The only thing MR's got over YOLT, Drax's actor, who's far better than Donald Pleasance as Blofeld (Telly Savalas was better).

Not trying to criticize here, just asking. Did you like Connery's performance? I really thought he was making a clear statement, "I don't want to be here!"

Mainly it's just the fact that Connery is in the movie (I preferred him to Moore), and that he gave a better performance than he did in Diamonds Are Forever (but, then again, who truly gave a good performance in DAF, except for Bernard Lee in the few scenes he's in, and Desmond Llewelyn).

Dr_Metz

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 said:

Oh Christ, another shadow...
8-|

What is that supposed to mean?

commandbond007

YOLT! MR is too science fiction

For me You Only Live Twice is slightly better. The excessive humour of Moonraker annoys me a little (specially reganding Jaws). However YOLT has some cheesy effects (Spectre's rocket) and silly things (the camera in the space for example). Talking about Bond performance, Moore was way better in MR than Connery in YOLT.

00Beast

Baltimore_007 said:
Connery had simply had enough by the time of 1967's YOLT, he even resigned from the part of all things during production, only to come back with some 'renewed enthusiasm' when they offered him an astronomical sum of cash to appear again, I would of paid Connery not to have done Bond again, at least after Thunderball, the desire and hunger was evidently in decline. Not so the case with Moore as despite the advancing years, Roger was having a whale of a time and taking in such grand sets as Brazil, Italy and San Francisco and just seemed happy to carry on in the role, until he realized that age was simply against him, up until that point he was happy in the part, something Connery evidently wasn't towards the end

Great points! That's why Roger Moore is much better than Sean Connery: he loved playing Bond from start to finish, and it wasn't all about the money!

Agent007391 said:

00Beast said:

Agent007391 said:
YOLT. It's got a better story, no space station scenes, and best of all, Sean Connery. The only thing MR's got over YOLT, Drax's actor, who's far better than Donald Pleasance as Blofeld (Telly Savalas was better).

Not trying to criticize here, just asking. Did you like Connery's performance? I really thought he was making a clear statement, "I don't want to be here!"

Mainly it's just the fact that Connery is in the movie (I preferred him to Moore), and that he gave a better performance than he did in Diamonds Are Forever (but, then again, who truly gave a good performance in DAF, except for Bernard Lee in the few scenes he's in, and Desmond Llewelyn).

Okay, that makes sense. I thought Lazenby was decent in OHMSS, but just because I like Brosnan and Moore a lot more (haha), he loses points because he isn't Brosnan or Moore.

BAIN123

Moonraker is impressive at times but my vote still goes to You Only Live Twice. It's not as silly and cringy as MR and takes itself a bit more seriously. I know its probably Connery's weakest performance but nonetheless...he's still cool ;)

Baltimore_007

I found it better if you evaluate them from a different angle such as a few words-

You Only Live Twice, Alien, Dull, Mundane, Uninterested, Anchored, Apathy, Strained

Moonraker, Nonsense, Absurd, Childish, Exciting, Vibrant, Lively, Cringeworthy

Let's face it, neither are hall of famers of the franchise but the latter alone deserves to win simply on the basis that despite it's overriding adolescent antics, it's a damn exciting bit of Bond fare and keeps the interest, something that You Only Live Twice simply fails to deliver. It's all I can add on this issue

DaltonCraig007

0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 said:

Dr_Metz said:
Goldfinger by far. Casino Royale is an abomination, and hopefully will be forgotten in a decade or so. Goldfinger is a better adaptation of the book as well. I don't remember Bond running through a construction site and breaking into an embassy, with only a slap on the wrist as a punishment in the Casino Royale novel. It's not really that "gritty" as everyone says, is it? Sounds like absolute fantasy to me. Also, 0BradyM0Bondfanatic7, it has the "Best Bond theme"? Are you kidding me? How is the OHMSS theme a lesser theme to Chris Cornell's whiny voice screaming incredibly bland lyrics?

Oh Christ, another shadow...
8-|

I tend to agree with that Dr_Metz said...

OHMSS69

YOLT despite the fact that Sean's performance was totally uninspired and he looked bored and overweight.
As for MR it is the worst film in the series. It is basically a rehase of TSWLM with less style and class. Just a stupid bunch of fluff. So the hell with MR my vote goes to

YOLT

Agent007391

OHMSS69 said:
As for MR it is the worst film in the series.

Even worse than DAD?

QsAssistant

You Only Live Twice easy!

I like Moonraker, it doesn't deserve the hate it gets, but YOLT is just a better film; it's in my top five. It has a better story and the most beautiful music in any Bond film. To this day I don't see what everyone is talking about when they say they can tell Connery didn't give a damn in YOLT; I think his acting is as great as it is in the other Bond films.

dragonsky

YOLT or MR?
Tough..
I choose YOLT

AussieBond

YOLT

00Beast

dragonsky said:
YOLT or MR?
Tough..
I choose YOLT

Hey dragonsky! It's been a while since I've seen you on here. Good to have you back!

JWESTBROOK

You Only Live Twice.

You can't say YOLT had a more out there plot than MOONRAKER, cummon.

Plus, beautiful set design, beautiful music (the whole basic theme for the movie is Barry's finest work imo, especially with the many drastic ways he altered it throughout the film), a great Blofeld and great climax, and possibly one of the most iconic Bond films, if not necessarily for a good reason.

Where the volcano became a widely known Bond-thing, MR's space hasn't had any parodies yet, it parodies itself. For me its a very good adventure only Bond could have produced.

Categories

In this Discussion

Announcements