Ranking Bond Movies by Era (not like other attempts)

2

Comments

  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    @MayDayDiVicenzo is an AVTAK fan, though. As you can deduct from the user name.
  • royale65royale65 Caustic misanthrope reporting for duty.
    Posts: 4,421
    What the DiVicenzo part?
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    He is an OHMSS fan first and foremost. Sensible lad.
  • MayDayDiVicenzoMayDayDiVicenzo Here and there
    Posts: 5,080
    I have many parts.
  • royale65royale65 Caustic misanthrope reporting for duty.
    Posts: 4,421
    And a part that loves the MayDay bank holiday!
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    edited October 2016 Posts: 10,588
    gklein wrote: »
    jake24 wrote: »
    No disrespect to your thread, @gklien. It's a great idea.

    Oh, no worries. I didn't take any disrespect. I was truly wondering what you meant by "Craig era hatred". Just curious, that's all.
    Silly mistake on my part. I misunderstood what we were ranking.
  • GBFGBF
    Posts: 3,195

    Here is another AVTAK fan...

    1. FRWL
    2. GF
    3. YOLT
    4. DN
    5. TB

    1. LALD
    2. TMWTGG
    3. DAF
    4. TSWLM
    5. MR

    1. TLD
    2. FYEO
    3. OP
    4. LTK
    5. NSNA

    1. AVTAK
    2. GE
    3. TWINE
    4. TND
    5. DAD

    1. CR
    2. OHMSS
    3. SF
    4. SP
    5. QOS
  • Posts: 462
    1. FRWL
    2. GF
    3. DN
    4. TB
    5. YOLT

    1. TSWLM
    2. LALD
    3. TMWTGG
    4. MR
    5. DAF

    1. LTK
    2. TLD
    3. OP
    4. FYEO
    5. NSNA

    1. GE
    2. TWINE
    3. DAD
    4. AVTAK
    5. TND

    1. OMHSS
    2. SF
    3. CR
    4. QOS
    5. SP
  • M_BaljeM_Balje Amsterdam, Netherlands
    edited October 2016 Posts: 4,436
    1. FRWL
    2. YOLT
    3. DR. NO
    4. GF
    5. TB

    1. LALD
    2. TMWTGG
    3. DAF
    4. TSWLM
    5. MR

    1. FYEO
    2. TLD
    3. OP
    4. LTK
    5. NSNA

    1. GE
    2. TWINE
    3. TMND
    4. AVTAK
    5. DAD

    1. OHMSS
    2. QOS
    3. SP
    4. CR
    5. SF

    BONUS:

    Number 1: RANK THE NUMBER ONES FROM EVERY LIST:
    In my case: FRWL, LALD, FYEO, GE and OHMSS.

    1. GE
    2. OHMSS
    3. FYEO
    4. LALD
    5. FRWL

    Number 2:

    1. TWINE
    2. TLD
    3. TMWTGG
    4. QOS
    5. YOLT

    Number 3:

    1. TMND
    2. OP
    3. DAF
    4. DR. NO
    5. SP

    Number 4:

    1. AVTAK
    2. TSWLM
    3. LTK
    4. GF
    5. CR

    Number 5:

    1. MR
    2. DAD
    3. NSNA
    4. TB
    5. SF
  • edited October 2016 Posts: 154
    @M_Balje

    Thanks for doing that 2nd part!

    I thought of asking folks for that very thing as part of this thread, but thought it might confuse people, since the whole idea of my ranking system was based upon the idea that it's near impossible to compare/rank movies across eras, given that the tone of each era is so different. HOWEVER, there is a way it could work...

    Let's say that your number one from the camp era is LALD (as yours is) and that your number one from the "serious" era of the 80s is FYEO (as yours is), then, if so, one could ask oneself "Does LALD work better as a camp Bond movie than FYEO works as serious Bond movie?", then ask the same of the other number one Bond movies from their respective eras and the tone of those eras, and then rank accordingly. Then carry on to the number two Bond movies from each era in this same manner, etc.

    I assume that this is what you've done. I'll follow your lead and do the same, but I can't get to it right now.
  • Posts: 154
    Birdleson wrote: »
    Funny that your "serious" Bond film features the deli scene, the hockey rink fight, Max the Parrot and the Thatcher scene. Don't get me wrong, I love FYEO, but a serious Bond film? Only in comparison to the one before and the one after.

    yep, it's all relative. the 80s bond movies were "serious" only in relation to the decade that came before, & that's precisely how i meant it. in the bond universe, there really is no such thing as a truly serious espionage movie. & isn't that what we love about bond? he's not an agent of le carre.

  • Major_BoothroydMajor_Boothroyd Republic of Isthmus
    Posts: 2,721

    Era 1
    1. FRWL
    2. DN
    3. GF
    4. TB
    5. YOLT

    Era 2
    1. LALD
    2. TSWLM
    3. MR
    4. TMWTGG
    5. DAF

    Era 3
    1. TLD
    2. FYEO
    3. LTK
    4. OP
    5. NSNA

    Era 4
    1. GE
    2. TWINE
    3. TND
    4. AVTAK
    5. DAD

    Era 5
    1. CR
    2. OHMSS
    3. SF
    4. QOS
    5. SP
  • GBFGBF
    Posts: 3,195
    Birdleson wrote: »
    Funny that your "serious" Bond film features the deli scene, the hockey rink fight, Max the Parrot and the Thatcher scene. Don't get me wrong, I love FYEO, but a serious Bond film? Only in comparison to the one before and the one after.

    I agree but I guess that all Glen films have their silly moments (at least the three Moore films). I also don't think that AVTAK is such a different film compared to the other two 80s Moore films. The basic plot is often very similar. There is a challenge between the Soviets and the West, so all have Cold war plot elements, all have a more serious and violent tone, just mixed with some silly humour in very few scenes. All Glen films have an ally that dies in the middle of the film which seems to irritate Bond or make him even seek for revenge. Moore's Bond is a more experineced agent who is more the protector and kind of a father figure for the leading lady (in fact, in all 3 80s Moore Bond films the back story of the Bond girls is very relevant to the plot an each time, the father played a role). Glen focused on a more realisitc and complicated plot, character devellopments and action instead of style and scale (no world domination plans).

    Therefore I think it is pretty obvious to put all the Glen films in one group. If one wanted to exclude one I would rather take LTK because some of the core elements of the other four films are missing (no cold war film, no focus on an official mission, no European setting, Bond girl not really essential to the plot, clear focus on personal issues).

  • edited October 2016 Posts: 154
    GBF wrote: »
    I also don't think that AVTAK is such a different film compared to the other two 80s Moore films. The basic plot is often very similar. There is a challenge between the Soviets and the West, so all have Cold war plot elements, all have a more serious and violent tone, just mixed with some silly humour in very few scenes. All Glen films have an ally that dies in the middle of the film which seems to irritate Bond or make him even seek for revenge. Moore's Bond is a more experineced agent who is more the protector and kind of a father figure for the leading lady (in fact, in all 3 80s Moore Bond films the back story of the Bond girls is very relevant to the plot an each time, the father played a role). Glen focused on a more realisitc and complicated plot, character devellopments and action instead of style and scale (no world domination plans).

    Therefore I think it is pretty obvious to put all the Glen films in one group. If one wanted to exclude one I would rather take LTK because some of the core elements of the other four films are missing (no cold war film, no focus on an official mission, no European setting, Bond girl not really essential to the plot, clear focus on personal issues).

    You make some good points. I'd never before thought of AVTAK that way. I've always seen it as a silly throw-back to the 70s Bond movie era, but, in starting this thread, placed it in the 90s era because of its over-the-top nature (like the other 90s Bond movies), while not quite being like the out-and-out silly "comedies" of the 70s, & also for the sake of balance (having 5 Bond movies in each era).

    I'm really biased against AVTAK though, as it's my host hated Bond movie, and that doesn't come from consensus. I remember hating it when I first saw it in the theater. It was the first Bond movie that truly embarrassed me as a Bond fan. That scene where grandpa Bond invites May Day into his bed actually nauseated me.

    Your point is even more well taken regarding LTK. There was a strong urge for me to place that movie in the "this time it's personal" era when I created this thread. However, in many ways, LTK does have more in common with the elements of the 80s Bond movie era than the Craig era and, also, that balance thing (of wanting 5 Bond movies per ear).

    Regarding the whole "this time it's personal" thing, it's a bit of a misnomer. Certainly the Bond movies have gotten more personal over time, but many Bond movies had a strongly personal element, going all the way back to Connery even....

    FRWL -- Bond is personally targeted by the Soviets working for SPECTRE. It's the whole plot of the movie.

    OHMSS -- That one is obvious.

    TMWTGG -- Scaramanga, as a hit man, has personally targeted Bond, setting-up the premise of the movie from the beginning.

    TSWLM -- Bond has killed the lover of XXX, who will take vengeance on Bond (or so we're led to believe).

    OP -- Bond's history with Octopussy's father.

    Many of the in-between movies had more subtle personal elements, such as Bond avenging other MI6 agents that have been killed (DN, TB, LALD, OP) or other types of personal elements (Melina's revenge motive in FYEO).

    The entire Brosnan era of Bond movies all contain strong and growing personal elements to the story that involve Bond and/or M, beyond simply going out on a mission.

    By the time we get to the Craig era though, the "personal" theme has grown to such an extent that the movies really are all about Bond himself, more than the mission. I didn't feel that was true about LTK, which is another reason I chose to leave it in the 80s era of "serious" Bond movies (relatively speaking), rather than placing it in the extremely personal Craig era.

    The "this time it's personal" theme has been a continually growing trend throughout the five decades of Bond, sometimes waning for a movie or two, only to come back as an even stronger plot element. Today, Bond movies are as much personal dramas as they are espionage stories, and far less the superhero movies they used to be in the 70s & 90s. The biggest loss in this, is that Bond is no longer a man of mystery, but someone we know way more about than I ever wanted to know (even though I do like the more serious take of recent movies).

  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489

    All right, doing it the balje way:

    No.1s:

    OHMSS
    GF
    FYEO
    TSWLM
    AVTAK

    No. 2s:

    CR
    DN
    TLD
    DAF
    TND

    No. 3s:

    FRWL
    SF
    LTK
    TMWTGG
    GE

    No.4s:

    SP
    TB
    LALD
    NSNA
    TWINE

    No. 5s:

    QOS
    YOLT
    OP
    MR
    DAD
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    Ranking by #1's, #2's etc. etc.

    Ranked #1's
    1. FRWL (clear winner)
    2. CR (very close to below)
    3. TSWLM (very close to above)
    4. GE (very close to above)
    5. OP

    Ranked #2's
    1. TB (close with below)
    2. OHMSS (close with above)
    3. LTK close with above)
    4. LALD
    5. TND

    Ranked # 3's
    1. DN (close with below)
    2. SF (close with above)
    3. FYEO (close with below)
    4. TMWTGG (close with above)
    5. AVTAK

    Ranked # 4's
    1. QoS
    2. GF
    3. TLD
    4. MR
    5. DAD

    Ranked # 5's
    1. YOLT
    2. DAF
    3. NSNA
    4. SP
    5. TWINE
  • GBFGBF
    edited October 2016 Posts: 3,195
    gklein wrote: »
    GBF wrote: »
    I also don't think that AVTAK is such a different film compared to the other two 80s Moore films. The basic plot is often very similar. There is a challenge between the Soviets and the West, so all have Cold war plot elements, all have a more serious and violent tone, just mixed with some silly humour in very few scenes. All Glen films have an ally that dies in the middle of the film which seems to irritate Bond or make him even seek for revenge. Moore's Bond is a more experineced agent who is more the protector and kind of a father figure for the leading lady (in fact, in all 3 80s Moore Bond films the back story of the Bond girls is very relevant to the plot an each time, the father played a role). Glen focused on a more realisitc and complicated plot, character devellopments and action instead of style and scale (no world domination plans).

    Therefore I think it is pretty obvious to put all the Glen films in one group. If one wanted to exclude one I would rather take LTK because some of the core elements of the other four films are missing (no cold war film, no focus on an official mission, no European setting, Bond girl not really essential to the plot, clear focus on personal issues).

    You make some good points. I'd never before thought of AVTAK that way. I've always seen it as a silly throw-back to the 70s Bond movie era, but, in starting this thread, placed it in the 90s era because of its over-the-top nature (like the other 90s Bond movies), while not quite being like the out-and-out silly "comedies" of the 70s, & also for the sake of balance (having 5 Bond movies in each era).

    I'm really biased against AVTAK though, as it's my host hated Bond movie, and that doesn't come from consensus. I remember hating it when I first saw it in the theater. It was the first Bond movie that truly embarrassed me as a Bond fan. That scene where grandpa Bond invites May Day into his bed actually nauseated me.

    Your point is even more well taken regarding LTK. There was a strong urge for me to place that movie in the "this time it's personal" era when I created this thread. However, in many ways, LTK does have more in common with the elements of the 80s Bond movie era than the Craig era and, also, that balance thing (of wanting 5 Bond movies per ear).

    Regarding the whole "this time it's personal" thing, it's a bit of a misnomer. Certainly the Bond movies have gotten more personal over time, but many Bond movies had a strongly personal element, going all the way back to Connery even....

    FRWL -- Bond is personally targeted by the Soviets working for SPECTRE. It's the whole plot of the movie.

    OHMSS -- That one is obvious.

    TMWTGG -- Scaramanga, as a hit man, has personally targeted Bond, setting-up the premise of the movie from the beginning.

    TSWLM -- Bond has killed the lover of XXX, who will take vengeance on Bond (or so we're led to believe).

    OP -- Bond's history with Octopussy's father.

    Many of the in-between movies had more subtle personal elements, such as Bond avenging other MI6 agents that have been killed (DN, TB, LALD, OP) or other types of personal elements (Melina's revenge motive in FYEO).

    The entire Brosnan era of Bond movies all contain strong and growing personal elements to the story that involve Bond and/or M, beyond simply going out on a mission.

    By the time we get to the Craig era though, the "personal" theme has grown to such an extent that the movies really are all about Bond himself, more than the mission. I didn't feel that was true about LTK, which is another reason I chose to leave it in the 80s era of "serious" Bond movies (relatively speaking), rather than placing it in the extremely personal Craig era.

    The "this time it's personal" theme has been a continually growing trend throughout the five decades of Bond, sometimes waning for a movie or two, only to come back as an even stronger plot element. Today, Bond movies are as much personal dramas as they are espionage stories, and far less the superhero movies they used to be in the 70s & 90s. The biggest loss in this, is that Bond is no longer a man of mystery, but someone we know way more about than I ever wanted to know (even though I do like the more serious take of recent movies).


    I agree to almost everything you say, Especially the "This time it's personal" issue. I also think that the difference is: In older Bond films "personal issues" were minor elements in the film to enhance the role of a certain character and to increase tension. Bond's motivation was hardly influenced by it and he almost always kept a strong focus on his mission.

    I find that LTK, TWINE, QoS, SF and SP are the films where Bond's or M's personal issues really dominate the film and the actual villain's scheme rather become a side plot. That's not entirely bad but becomes tiresome if it is used too often.

    I don't agree to one of your comments:

    "Today, Bond movies are as much personal dramas as they are espionage stories, and far less the superhero movies they used to be in the 70s & 90s."

    I read this very often but honestly I don't think that this is the case. I personally think that from a physical point of view, Bond has never been more unconvincing. I mean just look at all these chase and fight sequences. In the 70s Bond was rather a normal person and he was not twice as strong as any henchman. Today, Craig is able to beat a whole group henchman in a single fight with tied hands, shoot down a chopper from a speedboat, escape a crater base and blow the whole damm thing up with one or two shots, survive a free fall from a plane or an extremely high bridge, chase a freerunner over a construction area.... He never fails in anything...

    Never before has Bond been that unconvincingly strong and fast. In the older Bond films, Bond rather used a trick or his cleverness to win against his opponants. Today, he is much more a super hero who is simply stronger and faster than everyone else.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    Birdleson wrote: »
    Funny that your "serious" Bond film features the deli scene, the hockey rink fight, Max the Parrot and the Thatcher scene. Don't get me wrong, I love FYEO, but a serious Bond film? Only in comparison to the one before and the one after.

    Always considered FYEO as one of the more serious films.
    Sure it still has humour but the murder of the Havelock family, the most violent assassin of the series, Moore's most serious kill and moment, the sinister blonde Olympics guy, all the murderous attempts to end Melina's and/or Bond's lives, becoming sharkbait etc etc , the list is endless, oh and Lisl !!
    Only LTK was more serious and violent.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,687
    GBF wrote: »
    l
    Never before has Bond been that unconvincingly strong and fast. In the older Bond films, Bond rather used a trick or his cleverness to win against his opponants. Today, he is much more a super hero who is simply stronger and faster than everyone else.
    That's a problem I had with CR, and on. That's one thing I like in TWINE- Bond is suffering an injury during most of the film.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 3,985
    Era 1
    1. GF
    2. FRWL
    3. DN
    4. TB
    5. YOLT

    Era 2
    1. TSWLM
    2. TMWTGG
    3. MR
    4. LALD
    5. DAF

    Era 3
    1. TLD
    2. FYEO
    3. OP
    4. NSNA
    5. LTK

    Era 4
    1. GE
    2. TWINE
    3. TND
    4. AVTAK
    5. DAD

    Era 5
    1. CR
    2. OHMSS
    3. QoS
    4. SF
    5. SP
  • edited October 2016 Posts: 154
    GBF wrote: »

    I agree to almost everything you say, Especially the "This time it's personal" issue. I also think that the difference is: In older Bond films "personal issues" were minor elements in the film to enhance the role of a certain character and to increase tension. Bond's motivation was hardly influenced by it and he almost always kept a strong focus on his mission.

    I find that LTK, TWINE, QoS, SF and SP are the films where Bond's or M's personal issues really dominate the film and the actual villain's scheme rather become a side plot. That's not entirely bad but becomes tiresome if it is used too often.

    I completely agree with you assessment here.
    GBF wrote: »
    I don't agree to one of your comments:

    "Today, Bond movies are as much personal dramas as they are espionage stories, and far less the superhero movies they used to be in the 70s & 90s."

    I read this very often but honestly I don't think that this is the case. I personally think that from a physical point of view, Bond has never been more unconvincing. I mean just look at all these chase and fight sequences. In the 70s Bond was rather a normal person and he was not twice as strong as any henchman. Today, Craig is able to beat a whole group henchman in a single fight with tied hands, shoot down a chopper from a speedboat, escape a crater base and blow the whole damm thing up with one or two shots, survive a free fall from a plane or an extremely high bridge, chase a freerunner over a construction area.... He never fails in anything...

    Never before has Bond been that unconvincingly strong and fast. In the older Bond films, Bond rather used a trick or his cleverness to win against his opponants. Today, he is much more a super hero who is simply stronger and faster than everyone else.

    I only partialy agree with the rest of your assessment. Certainly the Craig Bond is tougher & more well trained as an assassin but, looking at the nature of the movies themselves... I remember as a child of the 70s making very little distinction between a Bond movie and, say, a Superman movie, except liking Bond more than any other superhero.

  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    That s right. Moore didn t get a hair strand out of place in his fights. It had become a joke. Craig bleeds blood.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    edited October 2016 Posts: 9,020
    I'd say that is blood running from his mouth and his hairdo is quite a bit disturbed after the fight.

    <iframe width="854" height="480" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/4AESnPfT2H4"; frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Great scene. The breath freshener he sprays into their mouths is quite the insult.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    There is only one Bond actor that got believably hurt and where it looked real.

    full.jpg
    full.jpg
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Or after the stairwell fight?
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    edited October 2016 Posts: 9,020
    No, because one minute (or some minutes more) later he was able to shag with Vesper in the hospital bed. Ridiculous. Just ridiculous.

    The stairway scene was quite ok. But most of the blood is not his. Still it is far from being as gritty as the scene in LTK.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    No, because one minute (or some minutes more) later he was able to shag with Vesper in the hospital bed. Ridiculous. Just ridiculous.

    With your insatiable sex drive, you should be able to relate. It s Eva after all.
  • royale65royale65 Caustic misanthrope reporting for duty.
    edited October 2016 Posts: 4,421
    Obviously some time had elapsed, like a few weeks.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    So the whole operation behind has just stood still for Bond to recover for some weeks. Nonsense.
Sign In or Register to comment.