› ›

Would you rather watch SF (92%) OR TB (85%)? Rotten Tomato Ranking battles!

1…173174175176177179»

Comments

  • DEKE_RIVERSDEKE_RIVERS
    Posts: 1,956
    TB.

    Are there any bikinis in Skyfall?

  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    Posts: 7,492
    TB, quintessential 60's Bond.
    SF, my least favourite of them all.

    So for me an easy choice for TB.
  • Mathis1Mathis1
    Posts: 8,160
    Thunderball for me!
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 15,635
    DEKE_RIVERS wrote: »
    TB.

    Are there any bikinis in Skyfall?

    Good point.

    I'd do TB too, although it would depend of my mood and the time of year. TB is my go-to summer Bond, SF is more for #Noirvember.
  • SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷SecretAgentMan⁰⁰⁷ Lekki, Lagos, Nigeria
    Posts: 2,557
    Thunderball.
  • marcmarc Universal Exports
    Posts: 2,615
    TB
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    Posts: 9,235
    SF anytime. TB has great cinematography (but so does SF), a few good scenes and a John Barry score. The rest is either borderline boring (the endless underwater scenes) or cheaply made (the final sped-up scenes). Celi is also a mediocre villain - Brandauer's Largo is far more impressive - while Bardem's Silva is just fantastically creepy and lunatic in his role. He could probably be successful if he ran for president in some places, which I leave to your imagination.
  • ColonelAdamskiColonelAdamski UK
    Posts: 1,139
    Thunderball for me, because it appeals to my purist idea of Bond much more than Skyfall. Those first four Connery Bond movies always seem part of Fleming's world more than anything that came after, (apart from, perhaps, OHMSS, but even then, GL wasn't Connery. Much as I enjoyed his performance).

    Skyfall is great though. A good Bond for the times, and Silva's the best CraigBond villain. But it's not as sleek, sexy, iconic and decadent as Thunderball. Skyfall is a great Bond flick from the modern era, but Thunderball is a classic Bond flick from the golden era. Those first four Connery Bonds are almost beyond reproach.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 9,590
    I’d go with SF, BUT @ColonelAdamski ’s sentiments totally align with mine regarding the special nature of the 60s films (please don’t virtually punch me, Colonel, 😂 . You made great points above). They’re magical. And everything that came after felt like it had to re-establish itself and pivot and re-construct itself to the new decade (which they mostly did with aplomb (bumps along the way (TMWTGG, latter 80s Bond trying to find his identity while competing with the new kids on the block).

    And that’s why I also love the Craig Era. It was as confident in itself as the 60s Golden Era was. But the 60s was so close to the decade Fleming was writing that these films were otherworldly. Love ‘em so much.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited 8:48pm Posts: 6,703
    Let the SF. It's a much more confident and watchable film. The opening credits alone I could watch over and over. A master class.

    I like TB in bits and pieces, fits and starts, but it's kind of a mess overall. And the cast is not great; Celi and Auger are definitely sub-par amid the other '60s actors.
Sign In or Register to comment.