Is TWINE the most divisive film in the series?

Aziz_FekkeshAziz_Fekkesh Royale-les-Eaux
edited May 2013 in Bond Movies Posts: 403
A few years ago, I would have said that either OHMSS or LTK were. Lately though, I think that the latter two have been overall accepted as two of the better films in the series (from what I see). There are some very vocal detractors of QoS, but again, it is either liked or at least seen as a middle of the pack entry by most viewers. I've even noticed that TMWTGG has gotten more and more positive reviews in the last few years.

Now comes the problem of TWINE. When I first got into Bond, I thought that the general consensus was that this was one of the better received entries but now it's obvious that some people here love it and some are strongly against it. Thoughts? This is my personal view of how these films have been received so feel free to chime in with your own overview!
«13

Comments

  • Posts: 30
    I assume you mean divisive?

    If someone felt statistically inclined, they could go through one of the ranking threads and see which movies have the highest variance in score. It would be interesting to see which ones are the most controversial, and which ones have the most consensus (albeit it would only tell you about MI6 users).

    Reminder that variance is the average of the squared differences of the mean! :)
  • Posts: 1,817
    @Siberia Are you also a fellow statistician?
  • pachazopachazo Make Your Choice
    Posts: 7,314
    I'd say that both OP and LTK are quite the wildcards. Although they are mostly praised here it's not uncommon to find them near the top or near the bottom on a lot of people's best of lists.
    As far as TWINE goes I think that most people are still negative about it.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,687
    pachazo wrote:
    As far as TWINE goes I think that most people are still negative about it.
    :-? I'd say most people are *meh* about it, not so much negative.
  • Aziz_FekkeshAziz_Fekkesh Royale-les-Eaux
    Posts: 403
    Not according to this guy:



    By the way, check out this guy's reviews; they're really well done and smart.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 5,921
    There is a divisive film from every era: for Craig, it's QoS; for Brosnan, it's TWINE; for Moore it's probably OP; and for Connery it's either TB or YOLT.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,687
    echo wrote:
    There is a divisive film from every era: for Craig, it's QoS; for Brosnan, it's TWINE; for Moore it's probably OP; and for Connery it's either TB or YOLT.
    I must just be some kind of Bond-hippie-love-child or something because I love all the movies you just listed.

  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    edited May 2013 Posts: 17,730
    I always thought it was rather good on its release in 1999. Now I don't know what fans make of it. It seems it tried to hard to be all things to all Bond fans and that's an impossible goal, really. I see TWINE as a continuation of the drama Bond storyline first seen in Brosnan's début GoldenEye, so for me that's a welcome and good thing.
  • Posts: 14,800
    echo wrote:
    There is a divisive film from every era: for Craig, it's QoS; for Brosnan, it's TWINE; for Moore it's probably OP; and for Connery it's either TB or YOLT.

    More like YOLT and DAF for Connery and MR for Moore, but otherwise I would agree.

    Regarding TWINE itself, even at a personal level I am feeling divided about it. There are some things I love about it, it might be Brosnan's best, in a way a precursor of CR, but overall it is messy and does not take advantage of its strength. And a recent interview with Apted really made me reconsider it as an arrogant, shallow Bond movie.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 17,730
    Ludovico wrote:
    echo wrote:
    There is a divisive film from every era: for Craig, it's QoS; for Brosnan, it's TWINE; for Moore it's probably OP; and for Connery it's either TB or YOLT.

    More like YOLT and DAF for Connery and MR for Moore, but otherwise I would agree.

    Regarding TWINE itself, even at a personal level I am feeling divided about it. There are some things I love about it, it might be Brosnan's best, in a way a precursor of CR, but overall it is messy and does not take advantage of its strength. And a recent interview with Apted really made me reconsider it as an arrogant, shallow Bond movie.

    Yes, I agree on YOLT and DAF for Connery - both are at the very bottom of my Bond film ranking along with DAD.
  • Posts: 1,492
    As much as i love it i would say qos,is the most divisive.
  • Posts: 14,800
    actonsteve wrote:
    As much as i love it i would say qos,is the most divisive.

    In the whole series, maybe.
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,459
    For me, it is definitely not divisive and hasn't seemed that way to my friends.
    I enjoyed it for the most part but it was disappointing after TND.

    Divisive in my Bondian world is OHMSS and LTK. Especially OHMSS.
  • Posts: 14,800
    Divisive in my Bondian world is OHMSS and LTK. Especially OHMSS.

    OHMSS I don't think is divisive, not among the fans anyway. Among non fans maybe. LTK it is slightly different, although the number of admirers is decisively higher than its detractors. I am not a fan of LTK, but I have to admit it is quite popular among the fans.
  • saunderssaunders Living in a world of avarice and deceit
    Posts: 987
    Ludovico wrote:
    Divisive in my Bondian world is OHMSS and LTK. Especially OHMSS.

    OHMSS I don't think is divisive, not among the fans anyway. Among non fans maybe. LTK it is slightly different, although the number of admirers is decisively higher than its detractors. I am not a fan of LTK, but I have to admit it is quite popular among the fans.

    I would agree with you on LTK, though I must admit that after years of being very much in the detractors camp for this one I have recently found it to be much more enjoyable and rewarding than I had given it credit for.

    As for TWINE I've always thought the general consensus was that it was fairly below average without being too horrendous, personally that's how I've always rated it, though I have always had a soft spot for the tank topped Dr Jones, who I gather everyone else hates!

  • Posts: 4,400
    I wrote this a while back on TWINE, may add some light on the film:

    The one overwhelming factor I noticed when watching the film was quite how good Pierce was in the movie. It all made me begin to wonder whether Brosnan in fact offered the most definitive version of the character in that film.

    Firstly, the actual movie itself is deeply underrated and I for one am shocked that we live on a planet where the below-par DAD is considered superior to TWINE. I mean, really? Surely now in a post-reboot/Daniel Craig-era we can finally appreciate TWINE as the forgotten and disregarded gem of the franchise.

    The opening of the movie is tremendous, the scene in the Swiss bank is Bondian-to-the-max, but in particular Brosnan really displays a dark tinge to the character in those early moments. The way he coldly executes the men followed by that close-up snarl before grabbing the Banker by the scruff of the neck and forcing him to count to three at gunpoint. It’s a dark scene, plagued with black humour and works well because Pierce plays it’s so straight. But it’s here we get the first revelation towards a more gritty realistic take on the character. He’s a spy and he kills people, it’s all very glamorous but also extremely dangerous. The boat chase is a perfect end to a fantastic pre-title sequence (I think the best), there’s just something about seeing those boats race across the Thames. What is most exhilarating is the fact that we can actually see that it is Pierce in the boat, it really gives a heightened sense of danger and excitement to see our leading man actually taking part in the action. The Thames chase is really the statement piece of the movie and it works well in really establishing a “And We’re Back” feeling to the Bond world. It’s high-class, sexy and audacious, everything Bond should be.

    Garbage’s title song is also on-point, but let down by Kleinman’s titles which just seem to slowly descend into a techno-coloured mess. His lowest point I dare say. So does TWINE live up to the promise it generates in its opening gambit? In short, yes.
    Why? Well, that’s easy to answer: the central dynamic between Bond and Elektra is really what makes this film tick. Brosnan maintains the darker grittier approach he displayed in the title sequence throughout the movie, but he marries it with his suave sophisticated persona that he has become so associated with. When I see him seduce the Doctor (wearing some rather lovely underwear) I really believe that she wants to sleep with him, Brosnan literally oozes with charisma and has always handled this aspect of Bond’s character with ease. It is in the TWINE that he really brings the danger back to Bond having already demonstrated how well he can handle the lighter moments. It is then the Elektra relationship that really gives him the chance to shine and build upon the character.

    While TWINE is a Bond film with all the trimmings, it is after all front-loaded with a large amount of absurd gadgets, girls, cars and exotic locales; but overall it feels less a servant to these elements than previous instalments. What Michael Apted has done is essentially make a more character-driven film which really lets Brosnan and Sophie Marceau fill the screen with a resounding amount of pathos. It’s their odd macabre relationship that keeps you hooked, the pair’s fling never feels forced and instead we are greeted with this delightfully interplay between the two which creates this rather twisted and interesting relationship. It’s made even more satisfying that Elektra is later revealed as the film’s villain, which boils down to that fantastic torture scene finale (one of the best scenes in any Bond film in my opinion). The twist is a really underrated moment in the film, which has been made more prevalent thanks to The Dark Knight Rises essentially ripping it off (Bane and Talia a poor man’s Renard and Elektra). Brosnan is at his best when he’s going toe-to-toe with Marceau, and the best scenes in the film feature the pair of them.

    There is also a great vulnerability on show in Pierce’s Bond here. We see him really get hurt and take a beating. Often praise is lauded on Craig’s portrayal on drawing on this aspect, but Brosnan did it first and just as well. We know Bond is in a bad way because of his shoulder but Apted also opens him up psychologically by allowing Elektra to explore 007’s persona that little bit more than we are used to. Elektra break him down in such a way that no other woman before has, not even Tracy and she exploits him. Does Bond love her? I think so, and Elektra plays on this, almost taunting him for being so foolish.

    The second act of the film doesn’t let off either , here Bond actually does some spying (something Roger Moore forgot to do) and the Kazakhstan segment of the film really cements the darker grittier Bond that Brosnan and Apted have carved. His first meeting with Renard is brooding and intense, I love the line “Cold-blooded murder is a filthy business” all while screwing on a silencer. Brosnan does, on occasion, have a tendency to slip slightly into the hammy, his reaction to Renard’s “No point in living...” is overacting at its best. So Brosnan’s acting can be slightly ‘loud’ at times, but if anything Pierce works better in those quieter moments when he doesn’t have to really make a case that he is ‘acting’ (think back to that great moment in the jacket bubble where Electra is having a panic attach or the final moment where he is holding her at gunpoint – quieter and more intense moments where he really shines).

    Marceauis really stunning, she is truly the most beautiful Bond girl there has ever been. She is seamless at portraying both sides of Electra’s character and its undeniable that her role is the best part written for a woman in a Bond film to date. Everything to her hair, to jewellery to costume design is impeccable and all add to creating this wonderful exotic beauty who is very easy to fall in love with. Robert Carylise is also great, and the central premise of his character is pure Bond villainy at its best – a baddie who feels no pain- excellent. It’s a neat touch how he still holds mi6 responsible for his soon-to-be death, opposed to the bullet-in-the-brain merely being a jumping off point in carving a villainous characture. A lot has been said about Denise Richards, so I may loose credibility when I say that I’m really not that fussed about her. It’s not that Christmas really adds to the film, but she hardly detracts from it either. I think she works and is perfectly serviceable to the story.

    The action is slightly excessive at points, and occasionally does feel rather staged. However, Brosnan is very good at it at and seeing him in action really adds to the excitement of the piece. Furthermore, the film is headed and tailed by two fine actions sequences, the submarine finale for me is up with some of the best, its vertigo-inducing at the same time as being pulse-pounding when delivering thrills. You can feel Apted’s documentarian soul coming across in the execution of the story, and the way it subtly deals with the politics of the oil world. Furthermore the photography of the movie is stunning, Adrian Biddle gives the film a really rustic lived-in feel, furthermore the sets are great with Elektra’s bedroom being a particularly stand-out. The only thing I really didn’t like where the last 2 minutes, M is apparently safe and sound in Scotland and Bond is having ‘Christmas in Turkey’ – talk about resorting to formula. It’s almost a default /screensaver ending and undoes a lot of the good work the film has done up to that point.

    So in sum up, TWINE delivers all the Bond thrills and spills you have come to expect but with an added dimension of character and pathos. The central relationship between Bond and Elektra is really makes this film work. The movie also harnesses a very complete and intriguing revelation into the character’s persona, as it is here 007 is vulnerable and human but still as charismatic and suave as ever. This is made even more interesting by the darker and tougher shade displayed by the character throughout the movie.

    The TWINE really does feel like the watershed before the DC era, it just seems a shame the more fantastical DAD strayed away from this path.
  • pachazopachazo Make Your Choice
    Posts: 7,314
    here Bond actually does some spying (something Roger Moore forgot to do)

    Well that's not true. I'm sure that I understand your overall point in that Moore's portrayal was the least Fleming like but he does indeed do some actual spying in his films.
  • Posts: 4,400
    pachazo wrote:
    here Bond actually does some spying (something Roger Moore forgot to do)

    Well that's not true. I'm sure that I understand your overall point in that Moore's portrayal was the least Fleming like but he does indeed do some actual spying in his films.

    Ok fair point it was a slight sweeping generalisation.

    My point is though that the Moore films symbolise the time where the series left it's espionage roots and became more fantastical affairs.

    One aspect of TWINE that I think was very well done were the actual villains. Firstly, the Electra twist is a great moment and more so than that the film then cleverly made Renard a sympathetic character.

    If you listen to TWINE dvd commentary track with David Arnold he talks about his dislike of the scene with Renard and Electra in bed together as it made him sympathise with Renard. Something Arnold didn't want to do as Renard is the 'villain' of the piece and was about to go and kill thousands of people with his nucleur submarine.

    But Arnold is so wrong to dislike the scene. It's a very clever moment where we realise how wicked Electra is as she has forced Renard, her captor, around her little figure. Moreover, we also know that she has Bond around her little finger as well. It makes the scenes between Bond and Renard even more twisted and gives their relationship with Electra a weird menage a trois feel. Something I think is a very nice and well played aspect of the film, and if anything reminds me of the weird Mother and son relationships going on in SF.

    I thought this link provides interesting reading:
    http://www.movie-moron.com/?p=24007
  • For me, it is definitely not divisive and hasn't seemed that way to my friends.
    I enjoyed it for the most part but it was disappointing after TND.

    Divisive in my Bondian world is OHMSS and LTK. Especially OHMSS.

    I'd add QOS to OHMSS and LTK as the 3 clearly most divisive entries. OHMSS and LTK I have personally seen grow in support from their debuts over the years, as I think will continue to happen with QOS- I've already seen a few people change and/or soften their stances on the film in the past 5 years, and I expect that will continue.

    Personally, I never saw TWINE as divisive but it's similar in many ways to a film that is. Like QOS, TWINE suffers due to an overmatched director and script issues. QOS had the poor Bourne-like editing that TWINE doesn't have, but then the poor acting performances of TWINE's key players and the failure of a complete script to be any, if better at all, than an incomplete and rushed effort makes TWINE a worse film for me. It doesn't have any excuses for it's issues. Like every one of the 23 entries, TWINE has some moments that stand out as positive, but to me it's a failure compared to the Brozzer's first two entries.

  • pachazopachazo Make Your Choice
    Posts: 7,314
    Ok fair point it was a slight sweeping generalisation.

    My point is though that the Moore films symbolise the time where the series left it's espionage roots and became more fantastical affairs.

    Sure, I understand what you're saying and agree with you overall. I just wanted to make sure that you got your facts straight ;) . No worries. Although you could make an argument that the more fantastical elements started creeping in by YOLT. Some people might even say GF. It's clear though that by the time we reach the end of MR we are in pure fantasy zone.

    but then the poor acting performances of TWINE's key players

    Really? Beyond Denise Richards I think that they all performed well with the material that they were given.
  • Posts: 14,800
    I think minus Richards acting is good in TWINE, but the writing very uneven.
  • Posts: 4,400
    For me, it is definitely not divisive and hasn't seemed that way to my friends.
    I enjoyed it for the most part but it was disappointing after TND.

    Divisive in my Bondian world is OHMSS and LTK. Especially OHMSS.

    I'd add QOS to OHMSS and LTK as the 3 clearly most divisive entries. OHMSS and LTK I have personally seen grow in support from their debuts over the years, as I think will continue to happen with QOS- I've already seen a few people change and/or soften their stances on the film in the past 5 years, and I expect that will continue.

    Personally, I never saw TWINE as divisive but it's similar in many ways to a film that is. Like QOS, TWINE suffers due to an overmatched director and script issues. QOS had the poor Bourne-like editing that TWINE doesn't have, but then the poor acting performances of TWINE's key players and the failure of a complete script to be any, if better at all, than an incomplete and rushed effort makes TWINE a worse film for me. It doesn't have any excuses for it's issues. Like every one of the 23 entries, TWINE has some moments that stand out as positive, but to me it's a failure compared to the Brozzer's first two entries.

    I think this post is very short-sighted.

    TWINE is a very divisive entry, possibly the most in the series. Some love it, others hate it.

    However, OHMSS? That film is universally loved within the fan community, scratch that - in the film community. It was a big hit with fans at the time of release, it's just the Lazenby controversy has marred it somewhat and made people think it was hated but the truth is far different. Over the years the haters have diminished to a very tiny minority and the film is regarded as one of the best in the series and if anything is one of the very few Bond films that can stand on its own and is now something of a cult classic.

    And in what world was TWINE a disappointment after TND? TND was a pedestrian run-of-the-mill 'Bond film', it was essentially an exercise in box-ticking. Pure formula. TWINE takes our preconceptions of the series and plays with the genre whilst also adhering and giving something new.
  • edited May 2013 Posts: 3,494
    For me, it is definitely not divisive and hasn't seemed that way to my friends.
    I enjoyed it for the most part but it was disappointing after TND.

    Divisive in my Bondian world is OHMSS and LTK. Especially OHMSS.

    I'd add QOS to OHMSS and LTK as the 3 clearly most divisive entries. OHMSS and LTK I have personally seen grow in support from their debuts over the years, as I think will continue to happen with QOS- I've already seen a few people change and/or soften their stances on the film in the past 5 years, and I expect that will continue.

    Personally, I never saw TWINE as divisive but it's similar in many ways to a film that is. Like QOS, TWINE suffers due to an overmatched director and script issues. QOS had the poor Bourne-like editing that TWINE doesn't have, but then the poor acting performances of TWINE's key players and the failure of a complete script to be any, if better at all, than an incomplete and rushed effort makes TWINE a worse film for me. It doesn't have any excuses for it's issues. Like every one of the 23 entries, TWINE has some moments that stand out as positive, but to me it's a failure compared to the Brozzer's first two entries.

    I think this post is very short-sighted.

    TWINE is a very divisive entry, possibly the most in the series. Some love it, others hate it.

    However, OHMSS? That film is universally loved within the fan community, scratch that - in the film community. It was a big hit with fans at the time of release, it's just the Lazenby controversy has marred it somewhat and made people think it was hated but the truth is far different. Over the years the haters have diminished to a very tiny minority and the film is regarded as one of the best in the series and if anything is one of the very few Bond films that can stand on its own and is now something of a cult classic.

    And in what world was TWINE a disappointment after TND? TND was a pedestrian run-of-the-mill 'Bond film', it was essentially an exercise in box-ticking. Pure formula. TWINE takes our preconceptions of the series and plays with the genre whilst also adhering and giving something new.

    I disagree with your assessment of my views, particularly on the subject of OHMSS. Perhaps you weren't around like I was when it was released, but the film was universally hated on it's release much more than either LTK or QOS. If you weren't alive or too young to remember this, you ought to defer to those like myself who were and will tell you the truth of exactly how it was back then. Indeed Lazenby's subpar replacement of Connery was the major cause of the hate, and that aspect of it hasn't changed all that greatly. He's almost consistently rated at the bottom of actor lists to this very day as the worst Bond, and it's easy to see why- he was a model and he couldn't act! Yes he was terrific in the action scenes, but anyone who knows anything about acting knows there is a lot more to it, and he was constantly coached throughout the film. What makes OHMSS popular now is the realization that the performances around him as well as the heavily Fleming based script are what makes the film work. George was "OK", actually better than Brosnan in some aspects of his Bond portrayal, but Brosnan is something George never was- a complete actor.

    TWINE on the surface "should" have been better than TND, but it fails in comparison. Why? Because TND at least gets the box ticking right. What's the point of lauding a film for originality when it fails to get the original ideas across in a proper manner? It's unforgivable for Renard to give Elektra's true motives away so easily, and Apted's direction is terrible. At no time does Renard come across as a threat where at least Carver is so ruthless that even his wife is easily expendable. A terrible waste of a great actor. If not for Marceau, Coltrane, Cucinotta, a terrific PTS and the finale of our beloved Q, TWINE could be running neck and neck with DAD as the worst of the worst.

  • edited May 2013 Posts: 388
    TWINE is a very divisive entry, possibly the most in the series. Some love it, others hate it.

    Put me down in the "meh" camp for TWINE. The action is very run-of-the-mill aside from the opening boat chase and also quite clumsily shoehorned into the film in most cases. The twist with Electra is an interesting idea that's poorly served (interesting that The Dark Knight Returns had similar problems when it tried the same twist) and the supporting characters of Renard, Mr Bullion and Christmas Jones are dull. John Cleese sticks out like a sore thumb. The finale is maybe the least memorable in the entire series. Brosnan gives a decent performance (he's never bad) but his "darker" Bond doesn't suit his strengths as a light comic actor as well as his performance in TND. TWINE also marks the point where he becomes a little lazy with his Irish-Ango-American accent ("Call him off!" becomes "CALIMOV!"). A few nice bits and pieces with MI6's Highland base and the painting of Messervy.
    However, OHMSS? That film is universally loved within the fan community, scratch that - in the film community. It was a big hit with fans at the time of release, it's just the Lazenby controversy has marred it somewhat and made people think it was hated but the truth is far different. Over the years the haters have diminished to a very tiny minority and the film is regarded as one of the best in the series and if anything is one of the very few Bond films that can stand on its own and is now something of a cult classic.

    The reviews at the time were mostly negative and whilst it still performed ok at the box office it was the least successful Bond film since DN at the time and grossed considerably less that YOLT (and DAF). It's now very popular in fan circles but it wasn't always so - when I first joined the fan community in the mid-90s it was unusual to consider it a favourite. It's reputation has improved considerably during that time. Not sure why you think it's universally loved within the film community at large?
  • edited May 2013 Posts: 388
    double post
  • @Sir_James- thank you for the second, intentional or not. Many people, even some of my fellow originals have fallen into the "let's excuse Lazenby" trap due to how awesome the film is. He deserves the least amount of credit for the film's renaissance over the years. It was the 99 cent, bargain bin DAD of it's day even into the 1990's as you noted.

  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,891
    I really like TWiNE, in fact it's my favorite Brosnan Bond. He really looks the part; in GE the hair was a bit to puffy and he was a bit too thin. TND has grown on me; but here was his closest to reaching his potential as 007. With that said, a stronger actress in the part of Christmas Jones and a more intimidating actor in the part of Renard could have lifted it from very good to classic.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 17,730
    talos7 wrote:
    I really like TWiNE, in fact it's my favorite Brosnan Bond. He really looks the part; in GE the hair was a bit to puffy and he was a bit too thin. TND has grown on me; but here was his closest to reaching his potential as 007. With that said, a stronger actress in the part of Christmas Jones and a more intimidating actor in the part of Renard could have lifted it from very good to classic.

    I agree that Brosnan gives a very fine performance as Bond in TWINE.

  • @Sir_James- thank you for the second, intentional or not. Many people, even some of my fellow originals have fallen into the "let's excuse Lazenby" trap due to how awesome the film is. He deserves the least amount of credit for the film's renaissance over the years. It was the 99 cent, bargain bin DAD of it's day even into the 1990's as you noted.

    Agreed on all counts @SirHenry and you put it better than I did. Lazenby gets a pass as his performance isn't utterly dreadful but he's the weakest of the six Bond actors by a considerable margin and it's no coincidence that he's the only one who was unable to establish a career beyond Bond.

    I remember at about the time of either GE or TND Brosnan gave an interview in which he said he would like to remake OHMSS as it had the most interesting material for Bond's character. The general consensus on alt.fan.james-bond at the time was that remaking any of the existing films was a bad idea but, if it were to happen, OHMSS would be the most suitable film as it was the most forgettable entry and also the biggest missed opportunity of the series! Hard to imagine now. I remember it quite clearly because I was a big defender of it, even then, and I often found myself taking the then-controversial view that it was a good film.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 17,730
    @Sir_James- thank you for the second, intentional or not. Many people, even some of my fellow originals have fallen into the "let's excuse Lazenby" trap due to how awesome the film is. He deserves the least amount of credit for the film's renaissance over the years. It was the 99 cent, bargain bin DAD of it's day even into the 1990's as you noted.

    Agreed on all counts @SirHenry and you put it better than I did. Lazenby gets a pass as his performance isn't utterly dreadful but he's the weakest of the six Bond actors by a considerable margin and it's no coincidence that he's the only one who was unable to establish a career beyond Bond.

    I remember at about the time of either GE or TND Brosnan gave an interview in which he said he would like to remake OHMSS as it had the most interesting material for Bond's character. The general consensus on alt.fan.james-bond at the time was that remaking any of the existing films was a bad idea but, if it were to happen, OHMSS would be the most suitable film as it was the most forgettable entry and also the biggest missed opportunity of the series! Hard to imagine now. I remember it quite clearly because I was a big defender of it, even then, and I often found myself taking the then-controversial view that it was a good film.

    Yes, I vaguely remember hearing Brosnan saying this all, too.
Sign In or Register to comment.