SirHenryLeeChaChing's For Original Fans - Favorite Moments In NTTD (spoilers)

1181182184186187224

Comments

  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    My own list of classics would be

    The first four films, so close to the time the books were written, and basically the
    Wonderful Fleming novels Put on film. Then OHMSS for the same reason. After
    A long wait until LTK, great to see Fleming's Bond back, and lastly CR, once again
    Reviving the spirit of Fleming again. =D>
  • delfloria wrote: »
    Question: How come people refer to the Bond villains as trying to "take over the world"? How many really did try and do that? U.N.C.L.E.'s adversary Thrush was keen on doing that but it seems to me that few of the 007 villains ever tried to do that.

    I am reminded of the mad scientist character in the Beatles' film Help! This movie is full of Bondish elements and even mashes the Bond theme into the soundtrack repeatedly. At one point said scientist muses aloud of the film's Maguffin, a ring which is stuck on Ringo's finger: "with a ring like that I could --dare I say it? -- rule the world!"
  • I find that we have refrained from listing You Only Live Twice as a "classic" Bond film -- and I wonder just why that is. Many elements of this film do qualify as top-flight. The volcano hideout, of course, is one of Ken Adams' greatest designs. Little Nellie is one of Bond's signature gadgets. The theme song is one of my favorites, lush and exotic, just beautiful. Could it be that Donald Pleasance's Blofeld, having been lampooned so effectively in the Austin Powers films, just leaves true Bond fans in a jaundiced mood? Any opinions on the issue of what disqualifies a film from consideration as "classic"?
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    edited August 2016 Posts: 45,489
    If it s both very new and very bad (like any Brosnan film), it certainly is no classic.
  • Birdleson wrote: »
    I listed it above.

    I'm sorry, @Birdleson, I missed that. Apologies!

  • Posts: 2,341
    @BeatlessansEarmuffs
    sorry bro, but I cannot get behind YOLT
    It has a wild OTT plot and premise
    The volcano set is impressive but that is not enough to qualify it
    Donald Pleasance is actually comical looking and a let down as Ernst Stavro Blofeld
    It leaves itself wide open to parody and face it: YOLT came dangerously close to imitating many of the imitators of the day.
    Is it a fun romp? Yea, I guess...

    I stand by my nominations: the first three, OHMSS, and CR as being classics. See my earlier post. :-*
  • @OHMSS: I wasn't nominating YOLT for classic status, I was wondering why most of us (aside from @Birdleson) feel it fell short. (Thunderball is another of the early Bond movies that has its share of detractors, Heck, there are those who even find fault with Goldfinger!) Just trying to generate some discussion. For me, the element that disqualifies this offering from being considered classic, is the "Bond turning Japanese" subplot. It just isn't convincing. I recognize that Fleming did it in the literary version of this story, but cinematically, with Connery slumping a little bit and getting a lousy haircut, it just doesn't work.

    Perhaps we need to take a good look at the nominations so far and how many votes each as received. Then anyone who's inclined can give their reasoning for or against the nominees...then, finally, a vote. Who's up for that?
  • edited August 2016 Posts: 3,564
    If it s both very new and very bad (like any Brosnan film), it certainly is no classic.

    Goldeneye came out more than 20 years ago. Not to argue the relative merits of every Brosnan film here & now (I wouldn't agree that each of them, or even most of them, is VERY bad) -- but how new does a film need to be, to be too new by your standards?
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    CR was an instant classic. Maybe the Fleming subplot was a huge part of that.

    What I argued was if it s bad and new. Some pretty mediocre entries, such as the aforementioned YOLT gets a "classic" status from many, just because it s from that initial Connery run.
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 7,948
    @Beatles I'm all for that voting, I find it very interesting to see what makes a film a classic. I'm one of thse who find fault in GF, whereas TB has been my nr.1 film for a long time. A film imo can only be a classic when you immerse yourself in it. Both GF and YOLT I can't do that due to too many plotholes. And indeed, Austin Powers doesn't do YOLT any favours either. But I guess the kidnapping of spacecraft was just a bit too outlandish for it's time.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    DN, FRWL, GF, OHMSS. Sixties Bond of the highest quality.
  • Well, our "nominating" process has been a bit chaotic, (my apologies for any inaccuracies) but here are my calculations for classic status mentions so far:

    Doctor No: 7
    From Russia With Love: 7
    Goldfinger: 7
    Thunderball: 6
    You Only Live Twice: 1 (no, that can't be right. @Birdleson, you only vote twice:) 2
    On Her Majesty's Secret Service: 6
    Live And Let Die: 1
    The Spy Who Loved Me: 4
    For Your Eyes Only: 3
    The Living Daylights: 3
    License to Kill: 2
    Goldeneye: 4
    Casino Royale: 7
    Quantum of Solace: 1
    Skyfall: 4

    Nominations are still open and if anybody wants to double-check my tabulations I'm fine with that. Just a few observations:

    Obviously, Connery-era Bond has a big advantage in the competition for Classic status.

    Dalton is held in fairly high regard: both of his entries are nominated (yes, as is 100% of Lazenby's tenure.) Brosnan, not so much: only 25% of his films are nominated, while 75% of Craig's films get the nod.

    YOLT, LALD, and QoS get 1 nomination apiece. Anyone care to defend or attack the nominations?

    CR is the only "modern" Bond film to receive near-unanimous acclaim. Perhaps due to the fact that this film had so much Fleming material to work with?
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    edited August 2016 Posts: 7,948
    I'll go and do the first attack: License to Kill.
    Even though the villain is menacing, it isn't really a Bond film. It's a revenge story, and an unlikely one, with importance shoehorned in.

    First off Leiter should, as a CIA operative, not (yet) be involved in the recapture of what in essence was just a drug baron. That's the FBI's turf. And Bond tagging along makes it even less professional. Then Bond hands in his resignation because 'nobody is doing anything'. That's sliding further down the scale of professionalism.

    Sure his infiltration is done well, but all in all there's a highly trained operative of MI6 going rogue on a personal revenge mission because his friend from the CIA who shouldn't have been involved in the first place lost his wife and hand. That says something about his judgement and emotional stability.

    Even worse, the villain, however impressively played by Davi, is not much more then a local druglord who's got a small time dicator in his pocket. He's no thread to the UK, he has no plan to 'take over the world' (to quote a question from another thread).

    All in all, Bond acts unprofessional and the villain(s role) isn't up to par for a true classic.
  • edited August 2016 Posts: 4,023
    Leiter was with the DEA.

    Bond also goes rogue in QOS and OHMSS.
  • edited August 2016 Posts: 3,564
    In OHMSS, Bond was at least finishing up a case he'd originally been assigned, albeit one that was shelved due to inaction. Blofeld still had a plan that threatened the world (in the movie version) and needed to be stopped.

    QoS is the film that really doesn't deserve classic status in my opinion. The shaky-cam action really harms the movie as far as I'm concerned. Over and over again I found myself thinking, "Wait! What just happened here? Did they -- ?" And while I personally found the plot original and interesting -- once I'd seen the movie several times and had pieced the whole thing together -- the plot to steal all the water in South America is just too "Real World" to be a proper Bondian scheme. There are actual existing companies striving to do just that legally, and they'll probably succeed eventually, forcing another peoples' uprising and putting some real-world Felix Leiter into the position of having to defend the capitalist oppressors. Rather than being an exciting diversion from real-world cares for a couple of hours, QoS was actually sort of depressing for me to watch. Give me a plot to turn all of the USA's gold radioactive for a couple of decades and I'm totally down with it. Give me a plot to turn most of the world's security systems into one gigantic Big Brother operation (lookin' at YOU, Spectre) and I can't be bothered.
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 7,948
    vzok wrote: »
    Leiter was with the DEA.

    Bond also goes rogue in QOS and OHMSS.

    True, forgot that bit. Makes little sense to me he ended up with the DEA, but anyways, that was a minor point. And Bond, and that's the main point, goes rogue on a personal vendetta. In both QoS and OHMSS (here he's just 'on leave' so it isn't even rogue as @Beatles mentioned) he keeps on going on the case itself. That makes a huge difference.

    @Beatles perhaps there's too much focus on the 'realistic' scheme in QoS, I can agree on that. But 'Quantum' (in hintsight SPECTRE) is larger then that. I agree on the shakey cam and perhaps too artistic an approach, but the film has a lot of style, wit, and even espionage. For me it has similar qualities as Dr. No, allthough the main villain is completely different. Actually, thinking about it, perhaps that's the best argument to get QoS of the list. The villain isn't impressive enough, not larger then life.
  • If anything. Dominic Green is smaller than life. General Madrano is a lot more interesting than Green. Also, let's not forget: QoS offers us the worst henchman of them all: Elvis. Case closed!
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,459
    I need to get back with you all on this. I will this afternoon. Thanks.
  • edited August 2016 Posts: 3,333
    It's said by many that Bond movies are only as good as his villains, and this maybe true. But for me a classic 007 movie is when Bond relies on his wits rather than the overused Q Branch. It seems that the writers seem to lose sight of the fact that Bond is super-intelligent and extremely resourceful. The best moments are for me is when Bond picks up something ordinary and uses it as a weapon or to his advantage. Some of the best examples can be found in OHMSS: Bond in the wheelhouse and ripping the pockets from his trousers and using them as gloves to edge out on the cable car wire; losing one ski in a downhill chase and having to perform with only one ski; using a bulldog clip, an eraser and a piece of metal strip to override the electric doors in Piz Gloria; using a telescopic sight as a spyglass rather than an aid to shooting with. I'm sure there's plenty more, but I think you get my point. The same can be said of Connery's 007 in Dr No and FRWL. Something as simple as using bamboo as a snorkel or using a chair to ward off Rosa Klebb and her deadly shoe blade are prime examples.

    Even GF has two electrifying scenes in resourcefulness: knocking the lamp into the bath (quick witted) and manoeuvring Oddjob into throwing his bowler hat into the metal bars and using a severed electrical cable to fry him. Even Moore got in on the act: the cigar/aerosol flamethrower in LALD, plus having to jump across the backs of alligators after his magnetic watch fails him is another great moment. These scenes are all iconic in their own way and elevate Bond from the ordinary. I think Jason Bourne has borrowed heavily from the old 007 Rule Book of Resourcefulness, especially with his fighting techniques: a biro pen; a book; a rolled up newspaper, etc. It works for Bourne and it used to work for Bond, before the writers got lazy and fell back on the over reliance of gadgets to get Bond out of a tight squeeze.

    So, with the exception of GF which is a classic due to the world first in gadgets, I think what makes a classic Bond movie is 007 using his super intelligence and not some Q Branch gadget that has already been telegraphed with its introduction in an earlier scene, so when it comes to Bond being in a tricky spot it comes as no surprise when he suddenly utilises it.
  • Posts: 1,296
    This is also what makes the coffin scene from Trigger Mortis so much to read. You're like, huh-WHAAAAA??

    Personal Ingenuity is a key ingredient in the Bond souffle.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,459
    OK I had mentioned awhile back my thoughts on what makes a classic Bond film, and I did list the ones that I personally consider to be classic Bond films.

    I am keeping that list, but adding back in the one I never meant to leave out (From Russia With Love) So here are mine, @BeatlesSansEarmuffs - just make sure you have mine counted in correctly (I think you do).

    Dr. No
    From Russia With Love
    Goldfinger
    Thunderball
    The Spy Who Loved Me
    For Your Eyes Only
    The Living Daylights
    Goldeneye
    Casino Royale
    Skyfall

    Note: Thunderball is not a favorite of mine, really, but it sure ranks as a classic for me with all the elements coming together and Sean's performance, as well as Luciana's.
  • (Striving mightily to bring this topic thread back to life, he said:)

    As our unofficial tabulator of votes for "classic" Bond film status, I am arbitrarily going to proclaim that a minimum of 3 votes is needed to award Classic status. Therefore, with several days having elapsed since our last entry, I believe we have decided that the following Bond films can be determined as Classics:

    Dr No -- 7 votes
    From Russia With Love -- 7 votes
    Goldfinger -- 7 votes
    Thunderball -- 6 votes
    On Her Majesty's Secret Service -- 6 votes
    The Spy Who Loved Me -- 4 votes
    For Your Eyes Only -- 3 votes
    The Living Daylights -- 3 votes
    Goldeneye -- 4 votes
    Casino Royale -- 7 votes
    Skyfall -- 4 votes

    Any carping? Any grousing? Any other animals you'd care to throw out there in a John Glen fashion? Speak now or forever...(leveling the sniper's rifle at a sensitive area)...hold your peace!
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 7,948
    That depends on your point of view I guess. For me, a classic film should still have a connection to the excitement, thrill and suspense that Fleming penned down. YOLT in my opinion misses out here. I find no excitement, no suspense, even though they try. I guess the execution needs to be at a certain standard too for a film to become a classic. Funnily enough it was Goldfinger and Thunderball that skyrocketed the cinematic Bond, yet it was YOLT that got parodied.
  • Posts: 4,023
    I guess there may be a difference of opinion as to what constitutes a classic film. Some may choose story or technical achievement ahead of iconic scenes.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,459
    I understand the elements of a classic Bond film being in YOLT, but it was problematic first time I saw it and every time since. I cannot consider it a classic ... unless we have borderline, flawed classics. I think in my mind, a classic needs to be great all around.
  • Posts: 2,341
    I agree with @4EverBonded...YOLT is overblown, extravagant experience but a closer look...just peel away the flash and you have a silly run of the mill adventure movie. I would call it a precursor to the CGI extravaganzas we are treated to today. Look at the sum totals and they add up to much ado about nothing.
  • edited August 2016 Posts: 1,296
    You Only Live Twice is a stone cold classic in some ways, but not the ways that matter sadly. It is embedded in our pop culture icongraphy and is responsible for many of the images the average ass on the street will conjure when produced to speak on the subject of Bond,

    However , time has not been kind and nobody can say in 2016 that YOLT stands to hang with the likes of DN, FRWL. GF. It has no pure and noble intention of telling a good story... And whats furthremore, I don't think you can call antyghing from the last 20 years a classic, just because it hasnt been long enough to even know.

    Also why is For Your Eyes Only on this list ?
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,687
    Birdleson wrote: »
    I just assumed that all of the originals had the same affinity for YOLT as I have, and the memory of how large it loomed. Sadly mistaken.
    Not mistaken here- I love it!
  • Posts: 1,296
    Does that make it a classic now though?
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,687
    IGUANNA wrote: »
    Does that make it a classic now though?
    YES.
Sign In or Register to comment.