The Bond Movies & Actors I Can't Stand (Negativity Only Please)

13637394142

Comments

  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited May 2016 Posts: 9,117
    Birdleson wrote: »
    That (the delays) is some horseshit. We grew up in a time when the films were one to two years apart, and those days are still the watermark in terms of quality and entertainment. The writing, which was one of the greatest strengths of the series, has become the major area of distress (say since the early '70s). Maybe a stricter timeline is what these people need. This excessive appeasement of writers, director and star has not been beneficial to the final product.

    Amen to that ^:)^

    I thought you think SP is a work of genius though? Can't have it both ways.

    Anyway to respond to @ Birdleson's fine post I do think that there's some, shall we say, sluggishness (I think to say 'laziness' would be a step too far) about EON's approach these days.

    Yes these films are a monumental undertaking these days but they were back in the day too. Nowadays you can travel pretty much anywhere with ease and half your work can be done by Internet.

    If there was a will for two year gaps then they are perfectly achievable. They just need to get a star who commits to it and not be held in thrall to emperors new clothes auteur directors who are no better than journeymen Glen and Campbell. The trouble is these days you sense that Babs would rather be doing other things and MGW is ready to retire and just has nothing left in the tank so they are both quite happy with a solid 18 months off between films.

    The one area that is tough is the script as back in the day Cubby had a whole untapped mine of Fleming to plunder. But then the 'more time between films = more time to polish the script' theory has been firmly debunked by SP's hotchpotch of a shooting script. It would've taken another 5 years to lick that into shape.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,492
    Birdleson wrote: »
    But it's not just plot, it's even more apparent and abhorrent in the dialogue. That sharp crisp wit has been replaced by sophomoric sex jokes (Brosnan Era) and teenage snakiness (Craig Era).

    "To the JOB in HAND."

    I don't have the slightest idea what you mean.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    Birdleson wrote: »
    That (the delays) is some horseshit. We grew up in a time when the films were one to two years apart, and those days are still the watermark in terms of quality and entertainment. The writing, which was one of the greatest strengths of the series, has become the major area of distress (say since the early '70s). Maybe a stricter timeline is what these people need. This excessive appeasement of writers, director and star has not been beneficial to the final product.

    Amen to that ^:)^

    I thought you think SP is a work of genius though? Can't have it both ways.

    What are you on lately?

    I always said the writing is the major problem in the franchise since TND. Furthermore I never approved BB waiting for Mendes.

    I still can find SP to be the best Bond since CR or GE.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2016 Posts: 23,883
    @BondJasonBond006, didn't you have SP ahead of GE in your rankings at one point? An unforgiveable travesty imho, but hopefully with time, this unintended error can be corrected.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    bondjames wrote: »
    @BondJasonBond006, didn't you have SP ahead of GE in your rankings at one point? An unforgiveable travesty imho, but hopefully with time, this unintended error can be corrected.

    Actually it is No 1 in my ranking :D
    Something only the following Bond movies achieved:
    TLD (1987-1995)
    GE (1995-1997, 1999-2015)
    TND (1997-1998)
    SP (2015-2016)

    It's quite possible, SP will fall behind GE-TLD-OHMSS at one point in the future. But it's a definite Top 5 entry.
    It could have to do with its predecessor which is the "unforgivable travesty" for me, if I may use your words :)
    SF is a crime in many aspects and just got lucky it came after QOS and had the 50th Anniversary tag on it. Had it followed CR it would have gotten considerably less favourable reviews and never reached the billion dollar mark.
    I was so disappointed with SF. Knowing SP is from the same team I didn't expect much.

    Nonetheless, SP has everything I was missing since GE/TND.
    Humour, excitement, OTT action and a 100% Bond feel.

    Sure, CR is a great movie and also belongs into the Top 5, but it is SP that finally showed us what potential was wasted with Craig in SF and QOS to some extend.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2016 Posts: 23,883
    @BondJasonBond006, as I've said before, it's all about expectations. Your's were suitably low as a result of your disappointment with SF, so SP could only impress. Mine in contrast were at cloud nine for most of 2015 due to SF being so impressive to me, so in a way it was almost inevitable that SP would disappoint.

    I still think it's a pretty mediocre film at best, but I'm sure some of that is on account of my positive impressions of SF.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    bondjames wrote: »
    @BondJasonBond006, as I've said before, it's all about expectations. Your's were suitably low as a result of your disappointment with SF, so SP could only impress. Mine in contrast were at cloud nine for most of 2015 due to SF being so impressive to me, so in a way it was almost inevitable that SP would disappoint.

    I still think it's a pretty mediocre film at best, but I'm sure some of that is on account of my positive impressions of SF.

    After TND I expected more of the same (GE-TND) and then came TWINE which disappointed me.
    After CR, QOS left me cold because of the editing and non-Bond feel, but I still loved it for the non-stop action and Olga:)

    I get that SF fans have trouble finding SP as good.
    The beauty of the franchise is that they give us such different movies. Sometimes two can be very similar TSWLM-MR or GE-TND, sometimes they change tone drastically TLD-LTK, OHMSS-DAF.
    Spectre has brought back many of the things I so missed in SF. Humour, self-irony, a proper Bond girl, a memorable henchman, an iconic villain, an almost Llewelyn level perfect Q.
    But I have to stop now, it's a negativity thread after all :))
    THOMAS NEWMAN SUCKS...there you have it :))
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,112
    I don't really hate this but it makes me laugh.

    DN - LTK they have that same M's office with moneypenny sat outside. Then they changed it with Brosnan, but clearly they weren't quite sure what should replace it. Each Brosnan film has a different version of the briefing scene. Well, by the time of QoS, they must have felt they needed to properly address how MI6 would look in the 21st Century. The results are hilarious. :))

    Everything is pure white, with glass walls and touch screen computer tables (what if M put her mug of tea down on that table and accidentally transfered funds to some terrorist group :)) ). Not only that, but M and Tanner can't seem to have a conversation face to face anymore. Instead... :)) , instead, despite sitting in adjoining rooms with just a sheet of glass between them, ( :)) ) Tanner has to talk to M on Skype, while she stares at him looking into his computer screen ... =))

    It's the most awkward thing ever! No wonder they scrapped the whole 'new MI6' idea and just went back to the classic design.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Yes, they finally came to their senses.
  • royale65royale65 Caustic misanthrope reporting for duty.
    Posts: 4,422
    Remember when one communicated via words and not emojis...
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,112
    royale65 wrote: »
    Remember when one communicated via words and not emojis...
    3:-O
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    royale65 wrote: »
    Remember when one communicated via words and not emojis...

    @-) :-? :-\" :D :-h
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited May 2016 Posts: 8,112
    Birdleson wrote: »
    I have never used one of those things, or any type of text speak, in my life. I pride myself on being able to convey intent and subtlety through dexterous use of the language. How in the hell did that become a rarity?

    :-@
  • Posts: 4,602
    Something that bugs me are actors who seem to think that Bond is some kind of pantomime (perhaps because they look down on the franchise) and produce silly OTT performances that IMHO help to undermine the film. Obvious examples for me would be Alan Cumming and John Cleese. I am sure there are more..give me time.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Christoph Waltz calls it a Punch and Judy show.
  • Posts: 4,602
    Toby Stephens (I think some of these guys are from the "lovey - theatre" brigade and I would take a guess that they don't see Bond as a worthy art from compared to Shakespeare etc. Take the money and run.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,112
    patb wrote: »
    Something that bugs me are actors who seem to think that Bond is some kind of pantomime (perhaps because they look down on the franchise) and produce silly OTT performances that IMHO help to undermine the film. Obvious examples for me would be Alan Cumming and John Cleese. I am sure there are more..give me time.

    Steven Berkoff in OP?

    That guy on the plane in QoS?
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    patb wrote: »
    Something that bugs me are actors who seem to think that Bond is some kind of pantomime (perhaps because they look down on the franchise) and produce silly OTT performances that IMHO help to undermine the film. Obvious examples for me would be Alan Cumming and John Cleese. I am sure there are more..give me time.

    Jonathan Pryce?

    I know for a fact Steven Berkoff felt this way and only did Bond and Rambo to fund his obscure theatre work but I can't bring myself to criticise him as his performance as Orlov is, to quote the aforementioned Mr Pryce, just too 'delicious'.

    I would add Toby Stephens to this if it wasn't for the fact I'm sure his ham was under direction from cretin Tanahori. He's clearly a Bond fan as evidenced by his numerous radio plays of the Fleming novels.

    Do we think Chris Walken felt this way? He's quite OTT (but fantastically so) but the 'star bracket' on the poster is an odd stipulation.

    It always felt like Bardem was pretty pantomime villain esque but more because he thought that was the genre rather than any disdain for the series which he always came across as loving in interviews.
  • Posts: 4,602
    Good call with Berkoff. He did the same thing with Rambo I think but as Rambo (post First Blood) was a pantomine, the performance was OK
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    patb wrote: »
    Good call with Berkoff. He did the same thing with Rambo I think but as Rambo (post First Blood) was a pantomine, the performance was OK

    I think youre splitting rather fine hairs to say that at the height of the Rog era to a serious thespian Bond wasn't a pantomime but Rambo was.

    Based on the previous 6 films since OHMSS or based on First Blood it would be pretty clear which series was the pantomime when signing on.
  • Posts: 4,325
    patb wrote: »
    Toby Stephens (I think some of these guys are from the "lovey - theatre" brigade and I would take a guess that they don't see Bond as a worthy art from compared to Shakespeare etc. Take the money and run.

    I think Stephens did a good job of playing Bond on BBC Radio Four's recent adaptations of Fleming novels.
  • Posts: 4,602
    patb wrote: »
    Good call with Berkoff. He did the same thing with Rambo I think but as Rambo (post First Blood) was a pantomine, the performance was OK

    I think youre splitting rather fine hairs to say that at the height of the Rog era to a serious thespian Bond wasn't a pantomime but Rambo was.

    Based on the previous 6 films since OHMSS or based on First Blood it would be pretty clear which series was the pantomime when signing on.

    Fair point, I was referring to the concept of Bond as a serious movie but yes, I concede the point re the RM era (boo, hisss, "he's behind you")

  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,112
    I even think Rosamund Pike falls into that category. She has a rather wide eyed expression on her face for most of DAD, and she is constantly overemphasising her lines:

    "Hope it doesn't SHRINK when it gets WET."

    "has Mr Bond been explaining his BIG BANG theory?"
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    patb wrote: »
    Something that bugs me are actors who seem to think that Bond is some kind of pantomime (perhaps because they look down on the franchise) and produce silly OTT performances that IMHO help to undermine the film. Obvious examples for me would be Alan Cumming and John Cleese. I am sure there are more..give me time.


    Do we think Chris Walken felt this way? He's quite OTT (but fantastically so) but the 'star bracket' on the poster is an odd stipulation.


    No. I remember him saying he loved Bond. A dream come true etc.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited May 2016 Posts: 9,117
    I even think Rosamund Pike falls into that category. She has a rather wide eyed expression on her face for most of DAD, and she is constantly overemphasising her lines:

    "Hope it doesn't SHRINK when it gets WET."

    "has Mr Bond been explaining his BIG BANG theory?"

    But again is that the direction (and the classic P&W script)? It was her big break so a bit disingenuous to be looking down her nose at it.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,112
    I even think Rosamund Pike falls into that category. She has a rather wide eyed expression on her face for most of DAD, and she is constantly overemphasising her lines:

    "Hope it doesn't SHRINK when it gets WET."

    "has Mr Bond been explaining his BIG BANG theory?"

    But again is that the direction (and the classic P&W script)? It was her big break so a bit disingenuous to be looking down her nose at it.

    I think ANYONE would be looking down their nose reading the script for DAD. She was probably just glad of the work.

    Whatever happened, it worked. She has somehow managed to dodge the millions of cream pies hurled at Hallie Berry over the years, even though I would say their performances are about equal all things considered. Sometimes being sexy girl number 2 is a blessing in disguise.
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    Posts: 6,791
    I must say though, I love Berkoff's completely deranged Soviet general in OP.

    As for Pryce, I never thought of him as the best Bond villain but I think he isn't one of the worst either. I wonder why he didn't go OTT in Pirates of the Caribbean (at least not to that extend). I suppose he must have thought that ridiculous wig was enough.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,112
    GoldenGun wrote: »
    I must say though, I love Berkoff's deranged Soviet general in OP.

    As for Pryce, I never thought of him as the best Bond villain but I think he isn't one of the worst either. I wonder why he didn't go OTT in Pirates of the Caribbean (at least not to that extend). I suppose he must have thought that ridiculous wig was enough.

    Because the roles are polar opposites. One is an honoured member of the aristocracy, the other is a crazed media mogul. I'm not sure he could have given the same or similar performance in both cases.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    I even think Rosamund Pike falls into that category. She has a rather wide eyed expression on her face for most of DAD, and she is constantly overemphasising her lines:

    "Hope it doesn't SHRINK when it gets WET."

    "has Mr Bond been explaining his BIG BANG theory?"

    But again is that the direction (and the classic P&W script)? It was her big break so a bit disingenuous to be looking down her nose at it.

    I think ANYONE would be looking down their nose reading the script for DAD. She was probably just glad of the work.

    Whatever happened, it worked. She has somehow managed to dodge the millions of cream pies hurled at Hallie Berry over the years, even though I would say their performances are about equal all things considered. Sometimes being sexy girl number 2 is a blessing in disguise.

    Youre right I suppose in that she is pretty hammy although that's totally down to the script and direction I think.

    I'm reminded of a single shot when Bond is escaping in the ice sled of Graves, Miranda and Vlad that looks like an episode of James Bond Jnr come to life (although I have to confess to a guilty pleasure in enjoying the look Graves gives to Vlad when he says 'he beat your time').

    Its interesting just how often the secondary Bond girl or femme fatale Bond girl is more memorable than the main one.

    Jill: Not saying she's overall more memorable than Pussy but for 3 minutes screen time she makes an impact (well painting her gold does).

    Fiona: Blows dull Domino out of the water. Even if Domino took her bikini top off right in front of me I think I'd struggle to stay awake she's so personality free.

    Aki: Has a bit more about her than innocent Kissy (although let's never forget it's Kissy's heroic swim that saves the world).

    Andrea: A far more interesting character than gormless Mary and with better writing they could have had her as the main Bond girl with the final act Scaramanga killing her and Bond confronting him on the island to get revenge.

    May Day: Struggle to count her as a Bond girl but he does shag her (braver man than me) so I guess she counts. Again a far better character than bog standard damsel in distress Stacey.

    Xenia: I love Natalya but it has to be said that Xenia steals the show.



  • Posts: 4,325
    I even think Rosamund Pike falls into that category. She has a rather wide eyed expression on her face for most of DAD, and she is constantly overemphasising her lines:

    "Hope it doesn't SHRINK when it gets WET."

    "has Mr Bond been explaining his BIG BANG theory?"

    But again is that the direction (and the classic P&W script)? It was her big break so a bit disingenuous to be looking down her nose at it.

    I think ANYONE would be looking down their nose reading the script for DAD. She was probably just glad of the work.

    Whatever happened, it worked. She has somehow managed to dodge the millions of cream pies hurled at Hallie Berry over the years, even though I would say their performances are about equal all things considered. Sometimes being sexy girl number 2 is a blessing in disguise.

    She was 23, fresh out of Oxford and offered a part in a major film - who would turn it down in those circumstances?!
Sign In or Register to comment.