›

"The things we do for frequent flyer mileage"...GoldenEye Appreciation and Discussion.

1…89111314

Comments

  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    bondjames wrote: »
    I have grown to appreciate her looks as I've gotten older, although Bach is still preferable for me (Ringo did good). Chiles looks smart imho. It was good casting.

    Don't get me wrong, Bach's attractive but I suspect under all that make-up she would have been quite plain-looking. Chiles I think would still look good without make-up.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    Neither remotely compare to Isabella though.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Isabella is impressive because she has personality, grit, humour and charm. She pulls it off without having to look provocative as well, which is doubly impressive. Chiles is similar imho.

    Bach is more of a throwback (glamorous and a little wooden) combined with modern. Also perfect for a Bond film.
  • barryt007barryt007
    Posts: 19,339
    bondjames wrote: »
    Isabella is impressive because she has personality, grit, humour and charm. She pulls it off without having to look provocative as well, which is doubly impressive. Chiles is similar imho.

    Bach is more of a throwback (glamorous and a little wooden) combined with modern. Also perfect for a Bond film.

    Really,you,er,know them personally do you,you naughty boy ?

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    barryt007 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Isabella is impressive because she has personality, grit, humour and charm. She pulls it off without having to look provocative as well, which is doubly impressive. Chiles is similar imho.

    Bach is more of a throwback (glamorous and a little wooden) combined with modern. Also perfect for a Bond film.

    Really,you,er,know them personally do you,you naughty boy ?
    I am referring to clothing. Both present themselves in a 'buttoned up' sort of way, which is somewhat unique for a Bond film.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    bondjames wrote: »
    Isabella is impressive because she has personality, grit, humour and charm. She pulls it off without having to look provocative as well, which is doubly impressive. Chiles is similar imho.

    Exactly.

  • barryt007barryt007
    edited June 2017 Posts: 19,339
    bondjames wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Isabella is impressive because she has personality, grit, humour and charm. She pulls it off without having to look provocative as well, which is doubly impressive. Chiles is similar imho.

    Bach is more of a throwback (glamorous and a little wooden) combined with modern. Also perfect for a Bond film.

    Really,you,er,know them personally do you,you naughty boy ?
    I am referring to clothing. Both present themselves in a 'buttoned up' sort of way, which is somewhat unique for a Bond film.

    It was a dirty joke,old chap !!

    A play on the words you typed,but I keep forgetting that 99% of Americans don't get our sledgehammer British toilet humour.

  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited June 2017 Posts: 11,189
    1146787.jpg

    images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRxgNcklzzo-Idqd-jKEBBgzWhim4cqB39q85AjXkiMAXNeOD6R
    Barbara who?

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    barryt007 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    barryt007 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    Isabella is impressive because she has personality, grit, humour and charm. She pulls it off without having to look provocative as well, which is doubly impressive. Chiles is similar imho.

    Bach is more of a throwback (glamorous and a little wooden) combined with modern. Also perfect for a Bond film.

    Really,you,er,know them personally do you,you naughty boy ?
    I am referring to clothing. Both present themselves in a 'buttoned up' sort of way, which is somewhat unique for a Bond film.

    It was a dirty joke,old chap !!

    A play on the words you typed,but I keep forgetting that 99% of Americans don't get our sledgehammer British toilet humour.
    I got it. Naughty obviously was the tip off. Just wanted to clarify because it could have been misconstrued by others. We do have a global audience here after all.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    Isabella is so lame esp compared to Bach and even Chiles.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    She's probably my fave if I'm being honest.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited June 2017 Posts: 11,189
    Getafix wrote: »
    Isabella is so lame esp compared to Bach and even Chiles.

    Trying to judge it as objectively as I can, there is NO comparison in terms of proper acting talent. Isabella is miles better than both of them as an actress. I agree that Isabella may not be the best dressed but she has a variety of different facial expressions and line deliveries that go beyond the monotone or the bland. There's life in her eyes. Something that neither Bach nor Chiles really manage.
  • GetafixGetafix
    edited June 2017 Posts: 11,425
    She has a 'variety of facial expressions'... And line deliveries that go beyond the monotone and bland .?

    Not exactly a ringging endorsement is it.

    Talk about damning with faint praise.

    You might as well have said 'she's really not as bland as you think she is. She has a great personality'
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited June 2017 Posts: 11,189
    Yes, she has a personality. She's charming, she sells being terrified early on (being the only one left alive amongst her dead colleagues) and she's convincingly independent.

    ..and she doesn't sound stoned whenever she delivers dialogue.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    I find Kara has more personality and even I can recognise she's pretty bland.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    Getafix wrote: »
    I find Kara has more personality and even I can recognise she's pretty bland.

    but what does Kara do other really do other than have a wide eyed expression and sound puppy-like?
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited June 2017 Posts: 23,883
    Scorupco is certainly expressive, but I still think some of you are giving Bach too little credit. She was plenty animated during key sequences (Lotus into the water, the flooding of Atlantis etc.) and as I said when I last watched TSWLM, the look she gave Bond when he chided her in advance for potentially being a bother to Naomi is priceless.

    Chiles played a nonchalant CIA operative very well. I found her far more credible than the useless Lowell.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    To be honest it's been so long since I watched GE I couldn't tell you much about Isabella other than (as you pointed out) she seems to be rather drably attired throughout. She looks like an M+S model. Whatever floats your boat I suppose.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    Chiles has a feistiness and gives Moore back what he gave, but other than that I think she's fairly limited. She doesn't sound particularly worried at the end when her and Bond are trying to destroy the globes for example.
  • GetafixGetafix
    Posts: 11,425
    Oh Chiles is pretty forgettable as well. I thought it was you who liked her?
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited June 2017 Posts: 11,189
    I think Chiles is attractive and prefer her to Bach, but I don't get the sense she has much range as an actress. As I said earlier, an attractive "soccer mom" acting tough.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    I like Chiles. She's supposed to be in control during that globe destruction sequence, and she is. If not for "hang on James!", she was pretty good.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    edited June 2017 Posts: 8,089
    Natalya and Kara are both brilliant.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    bondjames wrote: »
    I like Chiles. She's supposed to be in control during that globe destruction sequence, and she is. If not for "hang on James!", she was pretty good.

    The "co-operation? Maybe! Trust? Out of the question" exchange with Moore is her best moment in my view.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited June 2017 Posts: 23,883
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I like Chiles. She's supposed to be in control during that globe destruction sequence, and she is. If not for "hang on James!", she was pretty good.

    The "co-operation? Maybe! Trust? Out of the question" exchange with Moore is her best moment in my view.
    That was good, but her reaction to the legendary "A woman!" takes the cake for me every time.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited June 2017 Posts: 11,189
    bondjames wrote: »
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I like Chiles. She's supposed to be in control during that globe destruction sequence, and she is. If not for "hang on James!", she was pretty good.

    The "co-operation? Maybe! Trust? Out of the question" exchange with Moore is her best moment in my view.
    That was good, but her reaction to the legendary "A woman!" takes the cake for me every time.

    I think there was a bit of a feminist thing going on there. Chiles obviously enjoyed those sorts of lines, but I'm not sure there was really much else to both her and her character.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I like Chiles. She's supposed to be in control during that globe destruction sequence, and she is. If not for "hang on James!", she was pretty good.

    The "co-operation? Maybe! Trust? Out of the question" exchange with Moore is her best moment in my view.
    That was good, but her reaction to the legendary "A woman!" takes the cake for me every time.

    I think there was a bit of a feminist thing going on there. Chiles obviously enjoyed those sorts of lines, but I'm not sure there was much else to both her and her character.
    Possibly, but for 1979, she was pretty with the program. Moore had some forward girls in the later half of his tenure, after starting out with airheads and virgins.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    edited June 2017 Posts: 11,189
    Thinking about it I'm not overly fond of any of Moore's girls or indeed most of the women in the 80s. I think I actually liked Jane Seymour the best as there was no "limited actress with a feminist-agenda" syndrome. Melina Havelock was probably the most convincing "tough" woman.
  • noSolaceleftnoSolaceleft
    Posts: 1,162
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    I like Chiles. She's supposed to be in control during that globe destruction sequence, and she is. If not for "hang on James!", she was pretty good.

    The "co-operation? Maybe! Trust? Out of the question" exchange with Moore is her best moment in my view.
    That was good, but her reaction to the legendary "A woman!" takes the cake for me every time.

    I think there was a bit of a feminist thing going on there. Chiles obviously enjoyed those sorts of lines, but I'm not sure there was really much else to both her and her character.

    She still excuses herself for having been in a bond movie because she hates the way women are treated in those films, but says she simply couldn't refuse the money they offered her.
    Also, she's still an adamant feminist.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    I much prefer Isabella's attitude of "I'd be in a Bond film if I just walked around in a bikini".
Sign In or Register to comment.