MI6 Community Bondathon

13839404244

Comments

  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    @Birdleson, agreed. When I run through the films I've missed I'll read what each of you said about them at the time, to heighten my own experience of analyzing them. It helps that many Moore fans participated, as I could need some enthusiasm boosting throughout to see the good things.
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,570
    I'm not sure of your age Brady, so I don't know whether actually living through that era helps any. That was where Bond was back in the day, and although we did question some of the more outrageous aspects of the Moore era ('Moonraker' taking Bond into space as well as the comic aspects of the script, and in the 80s Moore's age as he gamely ploughed on as Bond) we had no option to use hindsight as the younger fans do now.

    It's all too easy to say where they went wrong, but in the 70s and 80s the films were almost made to order. So, we have a good deal of affection for these films because we lived and breathed them, and were grateful for any kind of Bond film on offer.

    So, had I hated Moore and everything he represented I would have surely dumped the Bond films long ago. And had we the fans all done the same I guess there may not be a series now for younger fans to enjoy.

    If I listed my Bond films I guess only a couple of Moore's would be in my top 10, but as an era during this remarkable series I probably have more affection for Roger Moore's output than any other actor.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    @NicNac, I don't want to fall down this rabbit hole over Moore again, as it never turns out well.

    I simply said in a very frivolous but benign way that I want to read what others said about each movie in his era to appreciate those films more. I have to do that every time I go back to them, because I understand they aren't my thing and I need to judge them not as regular Bond films, but Moore Bond films to get the most out of it. It's not a mark against them, it's just how I have to operate to be fairer to them and their overall style and formula, much in the way I assess Brosnan's. Much like you can't rate a drama by the genre conventions of a comedy, I can't force myself to judge a Moore film like a Connery, Dalton or Craig one, as that's frankly unfair and makes one very blind to their vastly different approaches.

    In short, I'm actually trying to respect these films, not detract from them as people seem to think. I'm not advocating that nobody in the 70s or 80s should've supported them, I'm not saying that the series didn't need them or that we'd be better off if Bond just ended in 1971. I'm simply trying to find the best approach to go about finding a way in to these films in a manner that I can comprehend them, accept them, and still find enjoyment from them. The last time I returned to the Moore era in my freshman year of college I went from being beyond indifferent to them to seeing the great location work, stunt choreography and cinematic flair they can represent at their best. In short, a bunch of negatives were partly erased by positives. With this Bondathon, I want to erase a lot more of those negatives so that I can one day soon watch them on repeat like any other films from my favorite eras and have a good time with them.

    It would be very nice for me if I could add at least 5 of Moore's films to my frequent watch list, because that means I'll have more Bond to revisit that I enjoy. I strive to be an unofficial historian of these movies, and I can't readily do that as effectively if I don't weather the storm and watch the movies I haven't liked as much before, searching for new ways to enjoy them while accepting them for what they are. I don't enjoy not liking them, obviously, it's just not easy for me to get into them. That's all.
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,570
    Yes I get that Brady I really do.
    You are right of course. I love The Beatles music but I don't like every Beatles song. It doesn't make sense to say I do.
    So, you see Bond from a more logical perspective

    I agree that to be a historian of a series you need to accept them all as being products of their time and appraise them as such. In fact a historian would need to be totally objective and perhaps offer no critical appraisal!! That would be difficult for any fan :)

    I think for me each film represents different eras and different aspects of the series, and it's overall diversity is the most fascinating aspect of it. I always say that to look at OHMSS, MR, LTK and TWINE as four films at 10 year intervals you see just how these films evolve and change. It's incredible. I don't like LTK and never look forward to watching it much, but I have seen it probably 12-15 times. Probably more. Who the hell watches a film they dislike that many times? It's insane!

    But we are fans so we do that sort of thing.

    .

  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    @NicNac, I think it's just down to our curiosity. We watch the Bond films we don't like beside the ones we do because we're fascinated to see how trajectories change, and how the series developed over time from era to era. The franchise embarrasses every other one out there for that reason, because each film is an exact time capsule of the day in which it released, from the styles of car and suits to geopolitics, morals, language and more. You can even spot what cinematic influences Bond is actively playing off of in each period, whether it's the shades of Hitchcock in Young's films or the black exploitation, space opera and revenge influences of Moore, and on and on and on.

    So when we watch a Bond movie, there's many layers. At the top, there's just that film, and we can enjoy it fine without going deeper. But belong that surface texture we can also analyze what the film says about the current events of the time, what the suits Bond wears say about that snapshot of fashion, and examine what genres Bond is being inspired by directly or indirectly throughout. More than any other films I can think of, there's a richness to them that goes beyond their own narratives that clue you in to how it was when those films first released. As someone who wishes they were born in the past, seeing each film has been a rare treat for me as I've been able to see the world I wanted to be a part of lived through by Sean, George, Roger, and Tim.

    But beyond the time capsule nature the franchise represents, they're also just films to be proud of. The effect that Bond had starting in the 60s is immense, and you can see endless posters of that decade that openly ripped the style of art and set design from the films liberally. In the 70s I'm overwhelmingly proud of the stunts and location work the team did on Moore's films, because they showed Bond at some of his highest technical peaks. Each era, though we all have our highs and lows in mind, have films that should be celebrated because of the massive impact they have had on everything after 1962 and in how they kept the series going no matter what. We can appreciate them for their stories or performances, and beyond that we can applaud them for their technical craft, effects and stunts that still have no challengers to this day. Bond has done so much and been so many places, and we're fortunate enough to go with him on those rides any time we wish. It's a great privilege.
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,570
    @NicNac, I think it's just down to our curiosity. We watch the Bond films we don't like beside the ones we do because we're fascinated to see how trajectories change, and how the series developed over time from era to era. The franchise embarrasses every other one out there for that reason, because each film is an exact time capsule of the day in which it released, from the styles of car and suits to geopolitics, morals, language and more. You can even spot what cinematic influences Bond is actively playing off of in each period, whether it's the shades of Hitchcock in Young's films or the black exploitation, space opera and revenge influences of Moore, and on and on and on.

    So when we watch a Bond movie, there's many layers. At the top, there's just that film, and we can enjoy it fine without going deeper. But belong that surface texture we can also analyze what the film says about the current events of the time, what the suits Bond wears say about that snapshot of fashion, and examine what genres Bond is being inspired by directly or indirectly throughout. More than any other films I can think of, there's a richness to them that goes beyond their own narratives that clue you in to how it was when those films first released. As someone who wishes they were born in the past, seeing each film has been a rare treat for me as I've been able to see the world I wanted to be a part of lived through by Sean, George, Roger, and Tim.

    But beyond the time capsule nature the franchise represents, they're also just films to be proud of. The effect that Bond had starting in the 60s is immense, and you can see endless posters of that decade that openly ripped the style of art and set design from the films liberally. In the 70s I'm overwhelmingly proud of the stunts and location work the team did on Moore's films, because they showed Bond at some of his highest technical peaks. Each era, though we all have our highs and lows in mind, have films that should be celebrated because of the massive impact they have had on everything after 1962 and in how they kept the series going no matter what. We can appreciate them for their stories or performances, and beyond that we can applaud them for their technical craft, effects and stunts that still have no challengers to this day. Bond has done so much and been so many places, and we're fortunate enough to go with him on those rides any time we wish. It's a great privilege.

    =D>
  • NicNac wrote: »
    I love The Beatles music but I don't like every Beatles song. It doesn't make sense to say I do.

    You know my name. Look up the number.
  • Posts: 4,024
    NicNac wrote: »
    I love The Beatles music but I don't like every Beatles song. It doesn't make sense to say I do.

    You know my name. Look up the number.

    Number nine, number nine, number nine.....
  • royale65royale65 Caustic misanthrope reporting for duty.
    Posts: 4,422
    Today I viewed Skyfall, and a good time was had by all.

    Daniel Craig's Performance in Skyfall

    The most traditional Bondian adventure for Mr Craig, in many respects, what with SF's levity and grandeur.

    In the PST, Bond is at the height of his powers, until M orders the “bloody shot”. From here, Bond is trying to “resurrect” himself, into the formidable agent he once was.

    Bond is annoyed at Eve for discharging her weapon on the bridge.

    We see Bond next in a beach hovel, and his apathy and pity are rather rampant. It's only because MI6 is under attack the Bond returns home.

    We get to see Bond's apathy and self neglect in short order, a call back to Fleming's later novels.

    Bond, as we see in M's apartment (I thought she told Bond not to break into her house?), is still pissed, from drink and with M. Once again, M doesn't trust Bond, to get the job done. Or as Bond put it “you lost your nerve”.

    Bond remains rather brusque and insouciant throughout SF. Perhaps he was playing to the crowd?

    The injury is still causing Bond problems, so he digs the bullet fragments out, after his woeful tests. He found that his arm was shaking, not ideal for a marksman.

    Despite him falling his test, M allows Bond back on active duty; M is trying to apologize?
    Only Mallory sees through it.

    The scene in which Bond is awaiting on M and Eve, is reminiscent of Fleming's FRWL, where by, Bond is a caged tiger, proving to be a nuisance to his own employers.

    Both Bond’s interactions with Eve and Q are provocative. Bond is seeing if they would raise to the bait; when they give as good as they get, Bond seems satisfied.

    When Bond encounters Severine, he is not fooled by her blunder. Thanks Vesper!

    “Don’t touch your ear”

    Bond still has the appreciation of the finer things in life - “perfect” he says to the bar woman.

    Bond's shoulder is still giving him trouble; he only just hung on under the lift. It's because of this, and his age, that he adapts his fighting style. In a similar style to the change between the brutal style of DN and FRWL, and the more stylised style of GF.
    The fight in the Macau Casino is a prime example. Bond raises his glass to his would be assailants, before fighting them. Note that Bond isn't too concerned when the thug grabs Bond's gun in the Komodo Dragon nest; he was using it to stall, while the Komodo Dragon got into position.

    The script writers gave Craig too many one-liners in SF; it dilutes Craig's more earnest portrayal, however.

    Two sequences that scream Fleming are, when Bond places his life in Severine's hands; a gamble on whether she would take him to Silva. And the second in when Bond, cornered by Silva and his thug in Scotland on top of the frozen lake. With no other option, Bond plunges him and the thug into the lake; Bond had no advantage on top of the lake, so maybe he would have better luck underwater – changing the game.

    Silva has a hilarious reaction to both M and Bond's melodrama, M's “regret would be unprofessional” and Bond's “resurrection”, after Silva asks him what hobby Bond does. Silva does an exasperated snort, each time.

    Onto Silva. Silva is trying to unsettle Bond, having him tied to a chair, and trying to shake his belief in M, by revealing Bond did not, in fact, pass the tests. And by advancing on Bond. Bond is equal to both of them – firstly Bond didn't expect to pass his tests (Bond's face when M said he passed the tests was of shock), and secondly Bond is jaded by the physical things.

    I think Bond was feigning, when he attempted to shot the glass off Severine's head. Bond had a gun pressed to his head by one of Silva's goons, when Bond has the duelling pistol.

    After Silva kills Severine, the goons guarding Bond, visibly relax. Which Bond was waiting for – he takes the goons out in short order. The quip, “waste of a good scotch” was Bond wanting to keep up appearances for Silva; he would expect Bond to be cavalier about it, even if Bond's not.

    The first half of SF is especially good, at delving into Bond's psyche. The second half of SF, however, is gives us more an expositional take on Bond – the deaths of Bond's parents for example. The film makers got it just right – delve too much into Bond's back story, and you lose that mystique.

    Bond's final scene with Dench's M, is emotional. Despite the hash she made of running MI6, she did get one thing right – Bond. And Bond needed to hear that. As M laid bait for Renard with Elektra, so M agrees to act as bait for Silva, in the climax.

    Bond's journey in SF was a hard one. He had to “resurrect” himself. But he did it. By the end of the movie, Bond was back. The beginning and end of SF see Bond at the height of his powers. And Bond's struggle in the middle third was quite diverting. Bond is a fighter, and he made it.

    Reflection -
    At the end of CR, we thought that Bond was back, a fully formed agent. Then we got QoS.

    At the end of QoS, Bond learnt his lesson, hence the gun-barrel at the end, signifying Bond was back. Then we got SF.

    At the end of SF, we got the traditional office, and all Bond's cohorts have been introduced.

    Certainly Craig has given us more to dissect in his three films, than the previous twenty.

    Which brings me on to the question, what would the other five Bonds have made of Craig's material?


  • royale65royale65 Caustic misanthrope reporting for duty.
    Posts: 4,422
    Royale’s Ranking -

    1. From Russia With Love
    2. On Her Majesty’s Secret Service
    3. Casino Royale
    4. Dr. No
    5. Goldfinger
    6. Licence To Kill
    7. Thunderball
    8. The Living Daylights
    9. The Spy Who Loved Me
    10. Quantum of Solace
    11. Skyfall
    12. The World Is Not Enough
    13. Octopussy
    14. For Your Eyes Only
    15. Tomorrow Never Dies
    16. GoldenEye
    17. You Only Live Twice
    18. A View To A Kill
    19. Moonraker
    20. Live and Let Die
    21. Diamonds Are Forever
    22. The Man With The Golden Gun
    23. Die Another Day
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,473
    Happy to see DN and QoS make the Top 10, @royale65. What makes you prefer TND and TWINE to GE?
  • royale65royale65 Caustic misanthrope reporting for duty.
    Posts: 4,422
    Boris mainly ;)
  • royale65royale65 Caustic misanthrope reporting for duty.
    Posts: 4,422
    Forgive me @Creasy47. I furnished you with a quip, instead of going indepth as to why I prefer TND and TWINE over GE.

    Maybe my disquiet over GE stems from the fact that it feels kind of alien. Just not quite a Bond movie. Which will make some of you start. For many Bond fans, GE is the quintessential Bond film. Yet, the music, the model work, the sets – the “concrete wall” buckles when Bond leans against it after he exited from the floor vent in the PTS, F.E. - all have an underlying cheapness to them, hinting at the budget was not, should we say, expansive as previous entries. Chronologically speaking, too, the look and feel to GE, is seemingly closer to LTK than TND, despite the two year gap.

    Not that I don’t love GoldenEye, however. There is a great cast; decent script; the action scenes are uniformly good; there is a real zip and zest to the proceedings and Brosnan is quietly effective throughout.

    TND serves up the classic Bondian tropes in a more up to date fashion. This film is tighter than its predecessor, Spottiswoode betrays his past as an editor; Brosnan is confident throughout, plus there is a great script here too, until they jettison it with the gung ho finale.

    Now, TWINE. First of all this was my first Bond film in the cinema. That’s a lame excuse, but there you go. I know TWINE isn’t to everyone’s tastes, but I find it be very good but very flawed.

    The real reason I so enjoy TWINE is the dynamic between Bond and Elektra. Pierce Brosnan excels as Bond turning in an elegantly lethal performance, despite, or maybe that should read in spite, of his “acting foibles”. Is TWINE a perfect film? Far from it. Does it succeed a being a more emotionally driven story? Not always. But TWINE tries its hardest, in amongst the protective bubble of formula filmmaking. However, the overall premise is inspired and all the Bondian attributes abound and in novel fashion. TWINE tries hard, and that is always a plus point in my eyes. Rather that than another by-the-numbers Bond film.

    Ah, neat, @Birdleson! Let me guess LALD and YOLT are in your top ten? My top seven-ish are stacked with 60's movies - the creme de la creme of the series.



  • royale65royale65 Caustic misanthrope reporting for duty.
    Posts: 4,422
    At last! I have finished our Bondathon. About time, hey!?

    Finally I viewed Spectre tonight. This marks the 10th time I have seen Spectre. The question “is it beginning to pall?” was a valid one. Did it hell. Up until the sequence at Blofeld's lair, I was seriously considering placing SP at the top of the tree. Craig has an unbelievable presence, in the vein of Connery and Moore. And Dr. Swann, and those eyes. Tragic, vulnerable and haunting. Gives great depth, which arguably the character doesn't have.

    We still haven't seen a Bond movie from Craig, in which he can be truly Bond, full of the gentlemanly conduct and charm, and joie de vivre that one expects. Up until Spectre that is. This is the performance from Craig that I have been expecting since Casino Royale. At the end of that movie, Bond’s journey had been completed, or so I (we) thought. But we got QoS – a sombre Bond thriller with moments of reflection and solace, mixed in with the frenetic editing, and Skyfall – the Bond film where Bond resurrects himself, where logic is often sacrificed for themes and motifs.

    But in Spectre we have Bond unburdened by his past. From Casino Royale, via Quantum of Solace and then Skyfall, we have seen Bond evolve. Like Sean Connery in Thunderball, Craig has such a presence that I’m able to look past some of those films flaws.

    - Yay, the gun barrel, returned to the start of the movie! At last.
    - “The dead are alive”. Some say that this is pretentious poppy cock, but I’m neutral about it. Certainly that message fits in well with the theme of the picture, be it a general creepiness to the film, the near deserted streets of London and Rome and most obviously, the Day of the Dead festival.
    - An unfortunate giggle from me when Bond sashays up the hotel stairs in his skeleton costume.
    - The walk from Bond, however, over the rooftops is pitch perfect, with the added bonus of the James Bond Theme, to boot.
    - A bit of levity, in what has been a relativity serious trio of films by Mr. Craig. After he blows the suitcase up, Bond looks over his cover, expecting to find a building, instead finding a crumbling building.
    - Ah, yes, Thomas Newman and his reused score. Maybe he was trying to link this film with Skyfall, but it just came off as lazy.
    - Great stuntwork throughout the PTS. Though, despite knowing the helicopter was done for real, it looked a mite fake. Perhaps the filter was the problem?
    - “There are moments of great luxury in the life of a secret agent”. After Bond has defeated Sciarra, he looks upon a brilliant sunset, and smiles.
    - I got a case of the goosebumps when the main titles showed Vesper. Kleinman is up to his usual high standards and I felt Smith matched him most of the time, despite me not liking Smith’s vocal style.
    - Insouciant, thy name is Bond.
    - I do like how Bond is trying to diffuse the situation with M, begging M to drop it and let Bond get on with his job. “I was taking some overdue holiday ”, laced with subtle meaning.
    - To C and Q, Bond is publicly not fazed by their actions. Bond is playing his cards close to his chest.
    - The gag from Q “I told you to bring it back in one piece” got a good laugh from the audience and still raises a smirk from me now.
    - I do like the music as Bond is entering Rome.
    - “Then the man was a fool” I quite agree James.
    - The SPECTRE meeting was great, but ruined slightly by the Blofeld connection, yet in this scene, he is suitably creepy.
    - As opposed to the visceral car chase that opens Quantum of Solace, this is more balletic and operatic. A nice change of pace for Craig.
    - Ah, Mr. White, we’ve been expecting you.
    - Ah, Dr. Swann. Despite not being quite as fully formed as say Vesper or Tracy, Lea Seydoux’s beguiling performance causes me to overlook that. And I do like her chemistry with Craig.
    - “I hadn’t noticed”. Quite James.
    - Shame they cut the bit about the ring out of the film. A two minute scene would go a long way to solving this particular quandary.
    - Dr. Swann using her initiative, and plunging the syringe into the goons chest.
    - “Enchanted”
    - “Its name is SPECTRE” - still sends shivers down my spine.
    - Despite the audience I was with getting restless during the Moroccan segments, I was, well, enchanted by the chemistry between Craig and Lea, the music and the whole retro vibe.
    - One thing I appreciate about the Mendes films is that they have more dialogue scenes and less set pieces. More thriller like, such as the 60’s/70’s films, and less actiony than the 90’s films.
    - The music as Bond and Dr. Swann discover White’s hidden room is beautiful. (I assume White paid the hotel to look the other way, perhaps he was rented that room?)
    - Craig looks spiffy in his ivory dinner jacket. While Lea looks stunning. Quite a charming couple.
    - “You shouldn't stare.” “Well, you shouldn't look like that.”
    - “I don't stop to think about it. ” “And if you did?”. Interesting one, that question. I assumed that Bond would get depressed thinking over his life, and the fact that, deep down, he would not survive past “retirement age”. If one stops to think, one gets ambushed. Best to keep moving, yet Bond senses that maybe with Dr. Swann, there is a life outside.
    - Still to this day I wince every time Bond and Hinx have their fight. This is a proper Craig era fight, but Craig is completely outmatched by that man mountain.
    - I tend to remember Bond fleeing down the kitchen to be longer - Bond flings a colander, some pasta, a couple of chickens, a bit of spaghetti, a great hunk of beef, two pieces of broccoli, a dizty pastry chef etc...
    - After the Hinx fight, things go down hill.
    - The SPECTRE lair is reminiscent of Dr. No’s base, even having tailored clothing.
    - Despite being led to his room by an armed guard, Bond does not let the initiative go to the villains. “Thank you”
    - O.K. I’ve got to a place the Bond/Blofeld connection doesn’t bother me, too much. Bond spend two winters as the Oberhauser place. In which time Franz came to resent Bond and Hannes. Franz went down a villainous path, while Bond went down his. Their chance meetings previous to this, were only coincidences, all be it happy ones for Franz and devastating ones for poor old Jimmy.
    - On first seeing Spectre, I though that Oberhauser was nervously chatting to his superior, Blofeld, when Bond is coming round. You know how underlings get nervous when their boss is around, and have verbal diarrhoea as a result?
    - Also Bond “coming round” has definitive shades to when Bond comes round to see Vesper and Mathis stood at the foot of his hospital bed, in Casino Royale.
    - Colonel Sun!
    - I would’ve liked for Bond to be disoriented after his torture, and let Dr. Swann rescue him.
    - “How safe is it, Sir?” (“As I would rather leg it, if it isn’t”) Tanner to M outside the Hildebrand store.
    - The triumphant Bond theme is shattered when the 4x4 rams into M’s Jag.
    - “Reverse!” I really hate Moneypenny’s shouting voice. Just calm down woman! Truth be told, I wouldn’t mind if they recast Moneypenny (or just to do away with the character altogether)
    - Brother Blofeld is making a big deal over confronting Bond, but to Bond’s great service, he is looking at Blofeld just like another nutter.
    - This has precedence in Fleming, where by Bond, on learning that Major D. Smythe's culpability in his “father figure” Hannes Oberhauser’s death, decides to let the Major commit suicide, via a scorpion fish. And his pet Octopus.
    - As Alec Trevelyan said, “007's loyalty was always to the mission... never to his friends”, when Dr. Swann briefly leaves Bond.
    - The monotonous scoring over the climax is just terrible. A repeat of “the Moors”, continuously looped.
    - Wouldn’t it be grand if from the rubble and dust of the SIS building, a full on James Bond Theme, announced that Bond was safe, and perusing Blofeld's helicopter?
    - I have accepted that Bond could down a civilian helicopter – it took him a fair few shots, aiming for a vulnerable spot.
    - Yet I like the musical theme for Dr. Swann, played over Westminster Bridge.
    - Like You Only Live Twice, Spectre's main fault lies in its confrontation between Bond and Blofeld.

    So, there’s your lot. And to (my maybe) penultimate rankings (depends if I move YOLT at all, next week or so)

    Royale’s Ranking -

    1. From Russia With Love
    2. On Her Majesty’s Secret Service
    3. Casino Royale
    4. Dr. No
    5. Goldfinger
    6. Licence To Kill
    7. Thunderball
    8. The Living Daylights
    9. The Spy Who Loved Me
    10. Quantum of Solace
    11. Spectre
    12. Skyfall
    13. The World Is Not Enough
    14. Octopussy
    15. For Your Eyes Only
    16. Tomorrow Never Dies
    17. GoldenEye
    18. You Only Live Twice
    19. A View To A Kill
    20. Moonraker
    21. Live and Let Die
    22. Diamonds Are Forever
    23. The Man With The Golden Gun
    24. Die Another Day

    A nice little collection of Craig films there. I decided that QoS’s editing problems were merely cosmetic, while SF and SP have some flaws inherent to their script, e.g. Silva’s easy escape to the tube and “Brother-gate”.

    Thank you, and Goodnight.


  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,473
    Looking forward to reading through that, @royale65. Once I garner enough energy to do it, I WILL do an analysis for the movie, and perhaps in the future I'll return to the films I missed and do one for them, as well.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    @royale65, a great overview. Just when I thought I was going to be the only one with positive things to say about SP.
  • JohnHammond73JohnHammond73 Lancashire, UK
    Posts: 4,151
    Good stuff @royale65.
  • Posts: 4,024
    @royale65 - I particularly like your point by point style of review. Very easy to take on board your points flowing through the movie.
  • 007Blofeld007Blofeld In the freedom of the West.
    Posts: 3,126
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    Nah they arnt real bond films
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Birdleson wrote: »
    Nah they arnt real bond films


    I disagree with that sentiment. They are films about James Bond based (more than several EON productions) on the works of Ian Fleming. They certainly aren't part of them series, and one can question the quality (I enjoy them regardless), but they are real Bond films.

    If someone is suing for wanting two independently made and entirely unconnected Bond films included in a release that compiles all EON and MGM made Bond films (hence "official"), then yes, they're idiots.

    Especially when one movie is panned in a "so bad it's good way" and the other was made by a long-time enemy of the Bond family who was a professional dick until death to them and the rest of Fleming's memory. Those films don't belong, nor would they ever be included amidst a collection that celebrated the very films at least one of them strategically tried to trash and the other parodied. We might as well include all the Austin Powers films if we ever allowed that to pass.
  • Agent_99Agent_99 enjoys a spirited ride as much as the next girl
    Posts: 3,108
    Spectre

    This was the first time I'd watched Spectre since seeing it in the cinema, and at the time I was pretty much carried along by the spectacle of it all. On this occasion, I tried to calm down and be a little more analytical (without much success).

    I thought the PTS was great at the time and I still love it (though it's pretty easy to tell which masked figure is Bond, because EARS). I do question the wisdom of picking a fight in a helicopter above a huge crowd, though.

    I'm not a fan of the theme, I'm afraid. I can't put it better than a colleague of mine, who once said he would 'rather listen to two otters squabbling over a fish head than Sam Smith'. The tentacle-strewn credits don't do a lot for me either (and nor do Daniel Craig's nipples).

    Craig's Bond is looking really great; he's bounced back from the physical and emotional wreck we saw in SF. How can the man make a woolly jumper look this stylish? My only complaint is that he sometimes seems a little stern, delivering what should be a funny line with unexpected vitriol.

    Lucia Sciarra makes a heck of a Bond girl. She's not around for long, but her appearance, voice and demeanour are really striking. However, I don't warm to messed up kid Madeleine Swann, or to her relationship with Bond, which seems to swing around like a compass needle without settling on a particular direction.

    As for the villains: you would not think it possible in this day and age to show a conference of baddies without it looking all Austin Powers, or that grey Nehru jackets, fluffy white cats and remote awesome lairs could make an unironic comeback, yet here we very successfully are. The only place where I feel the top has been slightly gone over is the mess Blofeld makes of MI6 in constructing his Bond trap; for a guy who's running a worldwide syndicate of evilness, he has way too much time on his hands.

    Mr White goes out with a bang not a whimper, and the unstoppable Hinx is a lot of fun. Villains who just laugh when you punch them always make me think of Get Smart, and during the train fight I half expect Bond to offer one of Max's "listen buddy, I hope I wasn't out of line..." apologies. ( I'm very squeamish about eyes, though, and I have to close mine for that bit at the Rome gathering.)

    Meanwhile, back at MI6: it's nice to see Moneypenny, Q and, eventually, M getting behind Bond, not to mention going out for a lovely meal together. Ralph Fiennes is turning into quite the Action M, and I like it. I do feel, however, that Bond's relationship with both Q and Moneypenny highlights the fact that his lifestyle looks pretty weird in the 21st century, while it could pass as normal-ish in the Sixties.

    There are some really beautiful locations on display here. The Austrian mountains are my favourite, but I also love Rome and the Casablanca vibe of Tangier.

    We're also treated to some of the loveliest action sequences of Craig's tenure. The car chase in Rome (the best possible place to have a car chase, because everyone drives like that anyway) is perfectly balanced, with just the right amount of humour. We get a fight on a train, and it's a good one. My favourite, though, has to be the plane in hot pursuit of the Land Rover cohort. It's over the top but I believe in it.

    General:

    I like the references to Bond's, and by extension Fleming's, youthful holidays in the mountains.

    You could write a book, or at least an essay, on whether James Bond should say 'toilet', since few terms are so intricately bound up in the British class system. I, for the record, wish he hadn't.

    Yes Bond, of course we believe you're going to chuck it all in for a girl. It worked so well for you last time. Nice ending, though; a satisfactory full stop for Craig's run if this does turn out to be his last, though personally I'd like him back.

    And finally: I remain hugely disappointed that the 'smart blood' wasn't the setup for a Roger Moore-style finale in which the headquarters staff gather round a screen and M asks Q to explain exactly what 007 is doing to cause these readings.

    Phew. Done. Thank you all for the opportunity to join in with the Bondathon! It's been great for a newbie like me to get to know some of you a little better and share my massively biased opinions.

    I've only been playing since TLD and it's been hard work keeping up, so hats off to those of you who've stuck with it all the way through.
  • Agent_99 wrote: »
    And finally: I remain hugely disappointed that the 'smart blood' wasn't the setup for a Roger Moore-style finale in which the headquarters staff gather round a screen and M asks Q to explain exactly what 007 is doing to cause these readings.

    Now that really would have been a step too far!

    Q: "The smart blood appears to be accumulating in a certain region of his body. Almost as if some villain had him strung upside-down with all his blood rushing into his head. No, wait a second. That isn't his...um...oh dear."

    M: "007!"

    Moneypenny: "That's my James."

    Tanner: "What is it? I still don't get it. What are we looking at here?"
  • C, edging in from off-screen in a full-body cast: "I guess now we really know what the 'C' stands for! Eh, guys? Eh? Eh?"
  • Posts: 4,024
    Counter-terrorism?
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    @Agent_99, I have enjoyed all your reviews. You have a fun style.
  • Agent_99Agent_99 enjoys a spirited ride as much as the next girl
    Posts: 3,108
    Thank you, @Thunderfinger! Your posts are always good value, so I really appreciate that.

    Thanks also to @Some_Kind_Of_Hero for sending me into a giggling fit in the office when I'm supposed to be working!
  • What to do after this Bondathon? One COULD watch other stuff of course (and of course, I will) -- but for those of us who, unlike @Birdleson, aren't burned out on Bond yet: what to watch next? I suggest re-watching in order of our rankings, in order to see if the films really do deserve the place we've given them. Do I really think GF deserves to be ranked above FRWL, for example? Is DAD really really REALLY the least enjoyable of the bunch? Perhaps re-watching them in the order we've ranked them might reveal something about the evaluation process?

    I watched GF just the other night. Enjoyable, but....maybe not #1 after all. We'll see....
  • royale65royale65 Caustic misanthrope reporting for duty.
    Posts: 4,422
    A bit of housekeeping before I move on to YOLT. Ta, for the comments regrading my "reviews". It's been a blast going through the Bonds with you all, my Bond Brethren (or perhaps "sistren" in lieu of @Agent_99 ?)

    I think I'm going to watch YOLT and DAF to see how they compare post Bondathon. Are they really worth putting them down so low on my rankings?

    I had the insane idea of doing another complete Bondathon - with the way I do them, it would be 2019 before I see the Craig films again.

    I say @BeatlesSansEarmuffs* hasn't GF been top for you since, like, ever. Man?

    *Just typed @Beatles and his username came up with only the "Beat" typed in! Very convenient.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    royale65 wrote: »
    I say @BeatlesSansEarmuffs* hasn't GF been top for you since, like, ever. Man?

    *Just typed @Beatles and his username came up with only the "Beat" typed in! Very convenient.

    It s a nice new feature, especially when referencing @0BradyM0Bondfanatic7
Sign In or Register to comment.