›

Rank the Barbara Broccolli/Michael Wilson Bond films

12357

Comments

  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou. I can still hear my old hound dog barkin'.
    edited June 2020 Posts: 8,688
    SF (barely)
    CR

    GE
    TND


    SP
    QOS



    TWINE (barely)
    DAD

    PS: This thread is considerably older than my presence on this board...but could somebody PLEASE correct the spelling of Babs' last name? "Broccolli" is like "Flemming" for me, and it shouldn't exist on a dedicated James Bond message board.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,526
    CR
    GE
    SP
    SF
    QOS
    TND
    TWINE
    DAD
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,330
    1.GE
    2.TND
    3.TWINE
    4.CR
    5.DAD
    6.SF
    7.QOS
    8.SP
  • CraterGunsCraterGuns
    Posts: 615
    1. CASINO ROYALE
    2. SKYFALL
    3. GOLDENEYE
    4. SPECTRE
    5. QUANTUM OF SOLACE
    6. TOMORROW NEVER DIES
    7. THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH
    8. DIE ANOTHER DAY
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,330
    Birdleson wrote: »
    @Murdock , we now have DAD in the same spot (so far as this group). Do you remember how harshly we used to disagree on that one when I first came on here?

    Haha I sure do. Things do change with time. :D
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    edited June 2020 Posts: 1,690
    Spectre Just so lovely to look at, and such a wonderful blend of the gritty CR approach, and some of the sillier touches of earlier films. I like the absolute goofiness of everything surrounding the Blofeld character, which strikes me as quite Flemingesque if one revisits the YOLT novel.
    Quantum of Solace Also quite lovely to look at. The colors, design, and costuming on show here are perhaps the best in the series. I also like when a movie can manage to be short. The brevity makes some of the first half harder to follow on first viewing, but quite rewarding when revisited. I doubt it was Marc Forster's intention, but I'd love to see Bond movies where things are designed to reward multiple viewings.
    Skyfall Maybe the strangest Bond film. I'm not wild about the first parts of the film, but once Bond is Bond (yet) again, after a shave in Macau, it's a wonderful and classic movie.
    Casino Royale Certainly a good film, and it has some wonderful action, but it's not especially Bondian, and the character has been changed pretty radically from any prior incarnation, whether in film or literature. The torture sequence is also reworked to not make much sense. The third (fourth?) act falls off quite a bit too, where Martin Campbell brings back some of his cringey "soap opera at the beach" scenes, and John Logan supplies a wholly unnecessary Venice sequence. I can see this one being still lower on the list before long.
    Die Another Day Octopussy is a wonderful Bond movie with just a dash of stupidity spread throughout. With DAD, it seems the lid on the "stupid shaker" came off accidentally and greatly overseasoned what could have been a much better film. Oh well. 80% of it is pretty good.
    Tomorrow Never Dies Really kind of an okay Bond movie, but is possibly the worst example of the dull, yet overblown third act. Still, I think I may prefer this to TSWLM.
    Goldeneye Once the title sequence is over, there's nothing left for me in this film. This is to me the worst written Bond by far, with several characters speaking in long blog posts they've written about James Bond, suggesting they own the VHS collection of the previous films. M, Natalya, and 006 should just start a podcast about James Bond tropes and leave extended meta discussion out of the film itself. Also never understood why Natalya takes up so much of the first half of the movie, or why the plot of the film has to be predicated on coincidence.
    The World is Not Enough Baffling.

    So for me, we've got two all-time greats, four really good, fun movies, the most overrated film of any movie franchise, and then TWINE, whose existence just puzzles me.

    Keeping in mind I'm not exactly mad for GF or YOLT, I'd say this run of movies from MGW and Babs compares favorably to any other run of eight in the series. And while I'm maybe in the minority, I see the quality of the movies as being on a largley upward trend. So here's hoping they don't sell!
  • OctopussyOctopussy Piz Gloria, Schilthorn, Switzerland.
    Posts: 1,081
    CR
    QOS
    SF
    SP

    GE
    TND
    DAD
    TWINE
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Octopussy wrote: »
    CR
    QOS
    SF
    SP

    GE
    TND
    DAD
    TWINE

    I sense a pattern.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    Octopussy wrote: »
    CR
    QOS
    SF
    SP

    GE
    TND
    DAD
    TWINE

    I could agree with this certainly.
  • Mathis1Mathis1
    Posts: 6,813
    Octopussy wrote: »
    CR
    QOS
    SF
    SP

    GE
    TND
    DAD
    TWINE

    Yep, the two eras were miles apart in terms of quality!
  • GeneralGogolGeneralGogol
    Posts: 928
    The overall cast and crew of the Craig era is no doubt more high-end than in the Brosnan years, but GoldenEye is still an awesome entry - more lively and memorable than QOS or Spectre.
  • Mathis1Mathis1
    Posts: 6,813
    GeneralGogol wrote: »
    The overall cast and crew of the Craig era is no doubt more high-end than in the Brosnan years, but GoldenEye is still an awesome entry - more lively and memorable than QOS or Spectre.

    Of the three you mention, QOS is most definitely the most lively!!
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    GeneralGogol wrote: »
    The overall cast and crew of the Craig era is no doubt more high-end than in the Brosnan years, but GoldenEye is still an awesome entry - more lively and memorable than QOS or Spectre.

    Of the three you mention, QOS is most definitely the most lively!!

    Very much agreed.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou. I can still hear my old hound dog barkin'.
    Posts: 8,688
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    GeneralGogol wrote: »
    The overall cast and crew of the Craig era is no doubt more high-end than in the Brosnan years, but GoldenEye is still an awesome entry - more lively and memorable than QOS or Spectre.

    Of the three you mention, QOS is most definitely the most lively!!

    Very much agreed.

    Yeah, but as lively as a pretty and serene flower bed being ground up by a rotary tiller, just to wreak havoc. Not what I need.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    GeneralGogol wrote: »
    The overall cast and crew of the Craig era is no doubt more high-end than in the Brosnan years, but GoldenEye is still an awesome entry - more lively and memorable than QOS or Spectre.

    Of the three you mention, QOS is most definitely the most lively!!

    I much prefer QoS to GE. Better Bond actor, better score, darker tone. GE is by far Brosnan’s best film and performance, but that still equals mediocrity to me.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,025
    QOS has the better Bond actor, but that’s all it has going for it. Compared to GE, QOS is utter trash.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,498
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    GeneralGogol wrote: »
    The overall cast and crew of the Craig era is no doubt more high-end than in the Brosnan years, but GoldenEye is still an awesome entry - more lively and memorable than QOS or Spectre.

    Of the three you mention, QOS is most definitely the most lively!!

    I much prefer QoS to GE. Better Bond actor, better score, darker tone. GE is by far Brosnan’s best film and performance, but that still equals mediocrity to me.

    @suavejmf -- I am definitely of this mind...
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,034
    MakeshiftPython wrote: »
    QOS has the better Bond actor, but that’s all it has going for it. Compared to GE, QOS is utter trash.

    I quite like QoS these days, but it's nowhere near as good as GoldenEye, for sure.
  • GeneralGogolGeneralGogol
    Posts: 928
    I always love to see QOS get respect and I appreciate the tone they were going for, with clear influences from movies like Chinatown, The Long Goodbye and Capricorn One. GoldenEye just feels more fun and complete. And both films have solid casts, but I don't find Greene, Medrano, Elvis, Mitchell, Slate, Lt. Orso, et al as interesting a bunch as Trevelyan, Ourumov, Xenia, Boris, Mishkin, heck even the Canadian admiral squeezed by Onatopp.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,025
    They’re easily the weakest villains of the franchise.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,526
    TLD had pretty weak villains. At least QOS had a Quantum meeting.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,025
    True, but Joe Don Baker had a toy room and Necros. 5 points to TLD.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited June 2020 Posts: 5,979
    I watched TLD again recently and what struck me was how Necros moved and kicked so fluidly, like a ballet dancer (which I believe the actor was). He's definitely the most distinctive of the Grant clones.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts: 7,526
    I agree that Necros and Whitaker were great, but Whitaker just seemed so incidental to everything else that was going on. Like someone Bond killed along the way to some greater plot.
    But Joe Don Baker as Whitaker was pretty fantastic, his delivery of every line was so perfect and memorable.
  • Mathis1Mathis1
    Posts: 6,813
    Think GE has the weakest set of villains. Love Sean Bean usually, but he adopts such a silly accent here, like he is doing a bad impression of Noel Coward, that its hard to take him seriously, Onatopp is poor mans Fatima Blush, and Orlov, though starting off well in the pts, soon turns into a hip flask swigging buffoon!
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    Think GE has the weakest set of villains. Love Sean Bean usually, but he adopts such a silly accent here, like he is doing a bad impression of Noel Coward, that its hard to take him seriously, Onatopp is poor mans Fatima Blush, and Orlov, though starting off well in the pts, soon turns into a hip flask swigging buffoon!

    Couldn t agree more.
  • FoxRoxFoxRox
    edited June 2020 Posts: 12,267
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    Think GE has the weakest set of villains. Love Sean Bean usually, but he adopts such a silly accent here, like he is doing a bad impression of Noel Coward, that its hard to take him seriously, Onatopp is poor mans Fatima Blush, and Orlov, though starting off well in the pts, soon turns into a hip flask swigging buffoon!

    I have to fully disagree on this one. Bean's accent doesn't bother me. His villain gets to have one of the most close and interesting relationships with Bond of any in the series. He knows Bond better than any other villain, and it shows. Onatopp's energy and craziness is on a level above any other's when it comes to femme fatales, and she's uniquely challenging for Bond physically. Ourumov's turn from confidence to "flask swigging" is logical and interesting progression as it shows his character losing control and becoming scared while under pressure.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    edited June 2020 Posts: 7,526
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    Think GE has the weakest set of villains. Love Sean Bean usually, but he adopts such a silly accent here, like he is doing a bad impression of Noel Coward, that its hard to take him seriously, Onatopp is poor mans Fatima Blush, and Orlov, though starting off well in the pts, soon turns into a hip flask swigging buffoon!

    I have to fully disagree on this one. Bean's accent doesn't bother me. His villain gets to have one of the most close and interesting relationships with Bond of any in the series. He knows Bond better than any other villain, and it shows. Onatopp's energy and craziness is on a level above any other's when it comes to femme fatales, and she's uniquely challenging for Bond physically. Ourumov's turn from confidence to "flask swigging" is logical and interesting progression as it shows his character losing control and becoming scared while under pressure.

    Yep. The cast of characters in GE is one of the main reasons it's very high on my ranking. To me they make it a very fun film. Bean's accent/voice doesn't sound noticeably different from his normal voice / voice in other performances, but what do I know as a lowly Canadian.
  • Mathis1Mathis1
    Posts: 6,813
    NickTwentyTwo wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    Think GE has the weakest set of villains. Love Sean Bean usually, but he adopts such a silly accent here, like he is doing a bad impression of Noel Coward, that its hard to take him seriously, Onatopp is poor mans Fatima Blush, and Orlov, though starting off well in the pts, soon turns into a hip flask swigging buffoon!

    I have to fully disagree on this one. Bean's accent doesn't bother me. His villain gets to have one of the most close and interesting relationships with Bond of any in the series. He knows Bond better than any other villain, and it shows. Onatopp's energy and craziness is on a level above any other's when it comes to femme fatales, and she's uniquely challenging for Bond physically. Ourumov's turn from confidence to "flask swigging" is logical and interesting progression as it shows his character losing control and becoming scared while under pressure.

    Yep. The cast of characters in GE is one of the main reasons it's very high on my ranking. To me they make it a very fun film. Bean's accent/voice doesn't sound noticeably different from his normal voice / voice in other performances, but what do I know as a lowly Canadian.

    Bean is from Sheffield in England, if you've seen the excellent 'Sharpe' series, youll know his real accent. Though that wouldnt have worked for Trevelyan, he does appear in other movies with an accent that is not as pronounced! The one he adopts in GE is just really irritating and false!
    I take the point about Ouromov (sorry about the typo of Orlov) but am not buying it about Onatopp, terrible character, that bizarre "sex" scene with the Admiral is enough to mark her down as poor!
  • FoxRoxFoxRox
    Posts: 12,267
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    NickTwentyTwo wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    Think GE has the weakest set of villains. Love Sean Bean usually, but he adopts such a silly accent here, like he is doing a bad impression of Noel Coward, that its hard to take him seriously, Onatopp is poor mans Fatima Blush, and Orlov, though starting off well in the pts, soon turns into a hip flask swigging buffoon!

    I have to fully disagree on this one. Bean's accent doesn't bother me. His villain gets to have one of the most close and interesting relationships with Bond of any in the series. He knows Bond better than any other villain, and it shows. Onatopp's energy and craziness is on a level above any other's when it comes to femme fatales, and she's uniquely challenging for Bond physically. Ourumov's turn from confidence to "flask swigging" is logical and interesting progression as it shows his character losing control and becoming scared while under pressure.

    Yep. The cast of characters in GE is one of the main reasons it's very high on my ranking. To me they make it a very fun film. Bean's accent/voice doesn't sound noticeably different from his normal voice / voice in other performances, but what do I know as a lowly Canadian.

    Bean is from Sheffield in England, if you've seen the excellent 'Sharpe' series, youll know his real accent. Though that wouldnt have worked for Trevelyan, he does appear in other movies with an accent that is not as pronounced! The one he adopts in GE is just really irritating and false!
    I take the point about Ouromov (sorry about the typo of Orlov) but am not buying it about Onatopp, terrible character, that bizarre "sex" scene with the Admiral is enough to mark her down as poor!

    The noticeability + enjoyment or disgust of accents is pretty subjective, so there's no point getting deeper into that. Agree to disagree. I guess I could see how one would be put off by Onatopp, but I find her kinky, violently sexual tendencies a great fit for a Bond villain. I mean, sex is such an integral element of the Bond series, so to see a villain use it in a really twisted, fatal way just works IMO. Maybe it comes off as silly or just weird to some, but I like it.
Sign In or Register to comment.