›

BOND POLLS 2016: The Top 10 JAMES BOND-007 Film Ranking Contest (Results: winner!, on page 60)

1…5051535556…59

Comments

  • Mathis1Mathis1
    Posts: 6,803
    Sad to see this come to end! It was great what with all the surprises! Well done Gustave-Graves!
    I have two left in the top 3, CR and my beloved OHMSS!
    My hunch is
    1. OHMSS
    2. CR
    3. FRWL
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    Posts: 6,778
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote: »
    CR wasn't going out of its way to be faithful (I don't know why this is an issue anyway), which it wouldn't have been able to do regardless when the book was written over 50 years before the production began.

    I like that CR uses Fleming as inspiration, then spins it into an adventure that is part adaptation, part original with the necessary fixes in between.

    It's not an issue, it's an observation.

    I think it's a good movie, but it's not nearly as faithful as as some of the earlier entries.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    GoldenGun wrote: »
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 wrote: »
    CR wasn't going out of its way to be faithful (I don't know why this is an issue anyway), which it wouldn't have been able to do regardless when the book was written over 50 years before the production began.

    I like that CR uses Fleming as inspiration, then spins it into an adventure that is part adaptation, part original with the necessary fixes in between.

    It's not an issue, it's an observation.

    I think it's a good movie, but it's not nearly as faithful as as some of the earlier entries.

    Yes, naturally not. This was also helped by the fact that Fleming was still producing books during the filming of the first three Bond pictures, such that the movies of the 60s weren't far removed from the 50s set books, making adaptations of the text easier.

    I must say I salivate at the idea of Sean Connery in 1962 or 63 in an adaptation of Fleming's Casino Royale. I would kill to see him at that point in his career act out the scene from the book where Bond is seated with a gun pressed into the back of his chair, or when he's being relentlessly tortured by SMERSH. The real shame of it is that in that day and age the book wouldn't have been able to be properly adapted as I'd like it to be, especially for some of the sadism laced throughout, which is partly why I'm glad the book wasn't adapted until the new millennium, where its contents didn't need censoring.

    I can't imagine how filmmakers of the 60s would've gotten around the torture sequence of Vesper's suicide. It would've been interesting to see, nonetheless.
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    Posts: 6,778
    Agreed.

    Connery in a 1960 adaptation of CR will always remain a Bond fan's wet dream, I suppose.
  • gkleingklein
    Posts: 154
    BondJasonBond006 wrote: »
    SF after CR would have gotten slashed by critics.
    SP in 2012 would have been praised to Heavens.
    SF got lucky coming after the disappointment of QOS and getting a perfect marketing storm because of the 50th Anniversary and Olympics.

    good points.

  • Gustav_GravesGustav_Graves
    Posts: 11,119
    SF wasn't just 'lucky'. The film did well on its very own merits. Some people assume way too much in here. Fact is SF is 5th and that DOES tell something of the quality of the film. Critically acclaimed outside the forum, and inside as well. A film that, after 4 years, can still easily compete with classics like GE, DN, TLD, TB and TSWLM.
  • SeanCraigSeanCraig Germany
    edited October 2016 Posts: 732
    SP would only be praised in 2012 like SF was (and is) if the movie would not shift in tone so much and would not feature all those unnecessary things many dislike (foster brother etc.)

    But I agree that most likely it would have become the film SP should have been due to that: More time produce a decent screenplay, no forced personal things just to repeat what has been successful in the film before. But SP as it stands today would not have been received by the audience and critics like SF was..

    My favourite items in SP would work quite good if it were a direct continuation of QoS:
    - Mr. White Storyline
    - Blofeld would remain Blofeld and no "relative" to Bond
    - Great way to bring back W and into the field
    - No former field agent becoming deskbound Moneypenny
    - Room for Dench's M to get into trouble due to Spectre

    Under these circumstances, I agree. But even if somebody does not like the motifs in SF so much it holds it's general tone much more than SP.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    GoldenGun wrote: »
    Agreed.

    Connery in a 1960 adaptation of CR will always remain a Bond fan's wet dream, I suppose.

    At least his introduction in DN is very similar to that in Fleming s CR.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    SF was a home run in terms of what it wanted to achieve.

    It is a visual masterpiece, with wonderfully expressed & drawn out characters. If one connected with the lustrous cinematography and the personalities, then the film resonated. If one didn't, then perhaps it understandably fell flat.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    bondjames wrote: »
    SF was a home run in terms of what it wanted to achieve.

    It is a visual masterpiece, with wonderfully expressed & drawn out characters. If one connected with the lustrous cinematography and the personalities, then the film resonated. If one didn't, then perhaps it understandably fell flat.

    This is how I feel about SP.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    edited October 2016 Posts: 9,020
    bondjames wrote: »
    SF was a home run in terms of what it wanted to achieve.

    It is a visual masterpiece, with wonderfully expressed & drawn out characters. If one connected with the lustrous cinematography and the personalities, then the film resonated. If one didn't, then perhaps it understandably fell flat.

    As usual nail hit on head!
    Perfect short analysis!
  • SeanCraigSeanCraig Germany
    Posts: 732
    BondJasonBond006 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    SF was a home run in terms of what it wanted to achieve.

    It is a visual masterpiece, with wonderfully expressed & drawn out characters. If one connected with the lustrous cinematography and the personalities, then the film resonated. If one didn't, then perhaps it understandably fell flat.

    As usual nail hit on head!
    Perfect short analysis!
    Well said!
  • Gustav_GravesGustav_Graves
    Posts: 11,119
    The results so far before we kick of the medal winners!:

    Start Countdown: The ruthless BOTTOM 5:
    #26 placed Bond Film, 000 POINTS --> "CASINO ROYALE" (1967, non-EON film)
    #25 placed Bond Film, 006 POINTS --> "NEVER SAY NEVER AGAIN" (1983, non-EON film)
    #24 placed Bond Film, 025 POINTS --> "DIE ANOTHER DAY" (2002)
    #23 placed Bond Film, 049 POINTS --> "THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN" (1974)
    #22 placed Bond Film, 049 POINTS --> "A VIEW TO A KILL" (1985)

    Start of TOP 21, the really average ones:
    #21 placed Bond Film, 060 POINTS --> "DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER" (1971)
    #20 placed Bond Film, 080 POINTS --> "TOMORROW NEVER DIES" (1997)
    #19 placed Bond Film, 095 POINTS --> "MOONRAKER" (1979)
    #18 placed Bond Film, 109 POINTS --> "YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE" (1967)
    #17 placed Bond Film, 135 POINTS --> "THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH" (1999)
    #16 placed Bond Film, 146 POINTS --> "LIVE AND LET DIE" (1973)[/color]

    Start of TOP 15, the OK ones:
    #15 placed Bond Film, 157 POINTS --> "QUANTUM OF SOLACE" (2008)
    #14 placed Bond Film, 196 POINTS --> "OCTOPUSSY" (1983)
    #13 placed Bond Film, 211 POINTS --> "FOR YOUR EYES ONLY" (1981)
    #12 placed Bond Film, 217 POINTS --> "SPECTRE" (2015)
    #11 placed Bond Film, 275 POINTS --> "LICENCE TO KILL" (1989)[/color]

    Start of TOP 10, the good ones:
    #10 placed Bond Film, 304 POINTS --> "THUNDERBALL" (1965)
    #09 placed Bond Film, 345 POINTS --> "THE SPY WHO LOVED ME" (1977)
    #08 placed Bond Film, 350 POINTS --> "GOLDENEYE" (1995)
    #07 placed Bond Film, 372 POINTS --> "DOCTOR NO" (1962)
    #06 placed Bond Film, 408 POINTS --> "THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS" (1987)

    Start of TOP 5, the true cinematic Bond-masterpieces!:
    #05 placed Bond Film, 419 POINTS --> "SKYFALL" (2012)
    #04 placed Bond Film, 562 POINTS --> "GOLDFINGER" (1964)
    9LaX4jg.jpg
    BRONZE MEDAL Bond Film, 738 POINTS --> "FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE" (1963)
    SILVER MEDAL Bond Film --> Reveal October 29th, 09:00 PM GMT+1
    GOLD MEDAL Bond Film --> Reveal October 29th, 09:00 PM GMT+1
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    It s the eternal top three, although they get juxtaposed from time to time.
  • vzokvzok
    Posts: 4,023
    Still think CR might pinch top spot.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    CR over FRWL, scandalous.
  • Gustav_GravesGustav_Graves
    Posts: 11,119
    Remember, quite big points gaps between 7th, 6th/5th, 4th, 3rd, 2nd and 1st place :-)
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    CR over FRWL by a large margin? Even more scandalous. People should be ashamed :P
  • SeanCraigSeanCraig Germany
    edited October 2016 Posts: 732
    Wow ... astonishing! I am not happy about FRWL being located below OHMSS. I have CR above FRWL in my personal ranking ... but I have to say I am really surprised again!
  • SeanCraigSeanCraig Germany
    edited October 2016 Posts: 732
    BondJasonBond006 wrote: »
    CR over FRWL by a large margin? Even more scandalous. People should be ashamed :P
    They both are wonderful movie versions of wonderful novels - I think it's ok.

    One person mentioned: Great to see Fleming's best material is fighting for the top spots!

  • FoxRoxFoxRox
    Posts: 12,258
    I can't say I'm not happy about it! I like FRWL, but it's lower in my Top 10. My Top 2 are the same! (maybe maybe not in a different order)
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    I'm quite disappointed by this result to be honest, as FRWL is a firm #1 for me.

    However the top 3 are in the company of greats anyway, so it's all good.
  • Major_BoothroydMajor_Boothroyd Republic of Isthmus
    Posts: 2,721
    FRWL is my favourite - I would have been happy if it was behind CR but behind OHMSS doesn't sit that well with me. Still - loving the poll suspense even at this late stage!
  • GBFGBF
    Posts: 3,195
    BondJasonBond006 wrote: »
    CR over FRWL by a large margin? Even more scandalous. People should be ashamed :P

    You are right! I also think that FRWL is the best of the remaining three... But well it am not really surprised.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,894
    ... really? I would have pegged it for the #1 spot (though, personally, it's my 4th favourite). 2nd place had to be CR, then.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited October 2016 Posts: 23,883
    To not have King Connery on top of a Bond film poll on a Bond fan site is a little disconcerting, but times are changing it would seem.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    That truly is a shock. Never would I think OHMSS would ever beat FRWL in my wildest dreams.
  • fire_and_icefire_and_ice
    Posts: 6,432
    My top three are TB, FRWL and OHMSS they rotate number one spot, in this poll which ever finishes top is worthy CR is a great film.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    I gave 12 points to OHMSS.
  • IncompetentHenchmanIncompetentHenchman
    edited October 2016 Posts: 1,817
    DELETE.
Sign In or Register to comment.