Controversial opinions about Bond films

13132343637705

Comments

  • Posts: 6,601
    Germanlady wrote:
    The DB5 is a cynical ploy taken by the producers to ensure the general public that a new Bond is going to be as good as Goldfinger! IMO, seeing the DB5 in a Bond film (post TB i.e. GE, TND, CR) shows that the producers know they are on to a loser with a film. Roger Moore films didn't need it, neither did Timothy Dalton because they could carry the film without needing to pluck on the critics and casual film fans nostalgia for what they see as a good 60's spy film. The DB5 belongs to Goldfinger. Skyfall and future Bond films, get your own car!

    The DB5 is everthing but a cynical ploy - and certainly Dalton would have needed it more, IF what you said, was the case.

    Why exactly would Dalton have needed it more?

    This was discussed over and over and you know my opinion about the man. For me, the weakest of the whole lot, because he was neither the charming boy like Moore and Brosnan nor was he a convincing hard guy with charme like Connery and DC. But you know, we don't really need to go into that again. I cannot convince you, that DC is better and visa versa. Its all good. Cheers...
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    edited April 2012 Posts: 13,899
    Samuel001 wrote:
    Germanlady wrote:
    The DB5 is a cynical ploy taken by the producers to ensure the general public that a new Bond is going to be as good as Goldfinger! IMO, seeing the DB5 in a Bond film (post TB i.e. GE, TND, CR) shows that the producers know they are on to a loser with a film. Roger Moore films didn't need it, neither did Timothy Dalton because they could carry the film without needing to pluck on the critics and casual film fans nostalgia for what they see as a good 60's spy film. The DB5 belongs to Goldfinger. Skyfall and future Bond films, get your own car!

    The DB5 is everthing but a cynical ploy - and certainly Dalton would have needed it more, IF what you said, was the case.

    Why exactly would Dalton have needed it more?

    Think about it. His Box Office takings were hardly the best.

    It was planned to appear in his third film, Bond 17, for the final time anyway.

    Wasn't the DB5 going to be blown up in China? I think it was. That to me sounds like a way of distancing Dalton from Connery, and not a ploy by EON to try and make Dalton more popular to the audience.


    And maybe this is just me, but I struggle to see Craig as tough when he pouts so much. It's as if he thinks he's on a catwalk.
  • Posts: 6,601

    And maybe this is just me, but I struggle to see Craig as tough when he pouts so much. It's as if he thinks he's on a catwalk.

    He does pout, yes - mostly when he is in motion and its not one of his better traits, I agree, but it dosn't take away the many moments, when he doesn't and is highly convincing - to me - as a tough agent. I think, this is one of the characteristics even those, who dislike him, agree on - that he gives the tough Bond version convincingly...only his Bond is much more then just a tough cookie..
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    edited April 2012 Posts: 13,899
    Germanlady wrote:
    He does pout, yes - mostly when he is in motion and its not one of his better traits, I agree, but it dosn't take away the many moments, when he doesn't and is highly convincing - to me - as a tough agent. I think, this is one of the characteristics even those, who dislike him, agree on - that he gives the tough Bond version convincingly...only his Bond is much more then just a tough cookie..

    As someone who dislikes Craig as Bond, I'd beg to differ. Connery did the tough guy act well, and he didn't overdo it too. He looked like he could handle himself in a fight, but at the same time, it didn't look too obvious.
  • DaltonCraig007DaltonCraig007 They say, "Evil prevails when good men fail to act." What they ought to say is, "Evil prevails."
    Posts: 15,692
    The problem is that they put forward Craig's toughness and deadliness by making him punch someone every 5 minutes... while Connery was tough and deadly only by sheer magnetic presence... not Craig's fault, since he doesn't write the scripts, but I hope that for the remaining films of his tenure, he will have more space to display his acting talents, his sheer magnetic presence, and not his physical strenght.
  • Posts: 5,634
    Maybe Craig is a little more agressive than his predecessors but I kind of like that in Bond, it's true that Connery didn't need to act tough, he had that screen presence, Craig doesn't really have that so a little boisterousness and agression may be needed for the actor when playing Bond. Don't know what level of said agression we will see from Craig in Skyfall but if it's anything similar from before, I won't feel too bad about it. James Bond isn't Goodfellas and has no place for over the top graphic violence and hasn't before and I hope we never will, but I don't mind admittedly a bit of blood and hostility if it's well presented, I'm always in favor of a more serious and agressive Bond, Dalton and Craig have done well for some in regards to that
  • edited April 2012 Posts: 6,601
    The problem is that they put forward Craig's toughness and deadliness by making him punch someone every 5 minutes... while Connery was tough and deadly only by sheer magnetic presence... not Craig's fault, since he doesn't write the scripts, but I hope that for the remaining films of his tenure, he will have more space to display his acting talents, his sheer magnetic presence, and not his physical strenght.

    Agreed...wow, never thought, I would say that :D

    @Baltimore - after CR, when people were blown away (well many) by his prformance, his screen presence was one of the most often named traits. I believe, its true, too - because even before I became a fan, I felt it in CR. Maybe partly because of it, I fell for him.
    There was a charming little quote from somebody during a discussion about the cast in the film "There were other people?" I think, althought blown out of proportion, of course, that nails it regarding his presence.
  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    edited April 2012 Posts: 7,854
    The problem is that they put forward Craig's toughness and deadliness by making him punch someone every 5 minutes... while Connery was tough and deadly only by sheer magnetic presence... not Craig's fault, since he doesn't write the scripts, but I hope that for the remaining films of his tenure, he will have more space to display his acting talents, his sheer magnetic presence, and not his physical strength.

    Well, back in the 60s, all one needed to do was punch a guy every once in a while and then he was obviously a bad ass. Nowadays, thanks to the myriad of action films that come out almost once a week, punching a guy once in a while isn't good enough anymore.

    Soon, even punching a guy every five minutes won't be good enough, and we'll need to see complex, slow motion moves that involve:
    punching one guy
    pulling a gun and pistol whipping another
    kicking a third
    shooting a fourth
    dropping the gun to surprise the fifth while roundhouse kicking the sixth
    then finally grabbing onto a pipe and snapping the fifth's neck with the legs.

    Hell, it was even complex to plan while writing it.

    However, while I like the brutality of Craig's Bond, I actually do like him based on his acting talents and his presence.
  • Posts: 12,837
    Samuel001 wrote:
    Germanlady wrote:
    The DB5 is a cynical ploy taken by the producers to ensure the general public that a new Bond is going to be as good as Goldfinger! IMO, seeing the DB5 in a Bond film (post TB i.e. GE, TND, CR) shows that the producers know they are on to a loser with a film. Roger Moore films didn't need it, neither did Timothy Dalton because they could carry the film without needing to pluck on the critics and casual film fans nostalgia for what they see as a good 60's spy film. The DB5 belongs to Goldfinger. Skyfall and future Bond films, get your own car!

    The DB5 is everthing but a cynical ploy - and certainly Dalton would have needed it more, IF what you said, was the case.

    Why exactly would Dalton have needed it more?

    Think about it. His Box Office takings were hardly the best.

    It was planned to appear in his third film, Bond 17, for the final time anyway.

    Wasn't the DB5 going to be blown up in China? I think it was. That to me sounds like a way of distancing Dalton from Connery, and not a ploy by EON to try and make Dalton more popular to the audience.


    And maybe this is just me, but I struggle to see Craig as tough when he pouts so much. It's as if he thinks he's on a catwalk.

    Would've loved to see the DB5 get blown up in some sort of epic chase, giving it one last appearence but also getting rid of the car. Dalton's 3rd film would've been so awesome.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    edited April 2012 Posts: 13,899
    Samuel001 wrote:
    Germanlady wrote:
    The DB5 is a cynical ploy taken by the producers to ensure the general public that a new Bond is going to be as good as Goldfinger! IMO, seeing the DB5 in a Bond film (post TB i.e. GE, TND, CR) shows that the producers know they are on to a loser with a film. Roger Moore films didn't need it, neither did Timothy Dalton because they could carry the film without needing to pluck on the critics and casual film fans nostalgia for what they see as a good 60's spy film. The DB5 belongs to Goldfinger. Skyfall and future Bond films, get your own car!

    The DB5 is everthing but a cynical ploy - and certainly Dalton would have needed it more, IF what you said, was the case.

    Why exactly would Dalton have needed it more?

    Think about it. His Box Office takings were hardly the best.

    It was planned to appear in his third film, Bond 17, for the final time anyway.

    Wasn't the DB5 going to be blown up in China? I think it was. That to me sounds like a way of distancing Dalton from Connery, and not a ploy by EON to try and make Dalton more popular to the audience.


    And maybe this is just me, but I struggle to see Craig as tough when he pouts so much. It's as if he thinks he's on a catwalk.

    Would've loved to see the DB5 get blown up in some sort of epic chase, giving it one last appearence but also getting rid of the car. Dalton's 3rd film would've been so awesome.

    Other than Bond fighting robots (I seriously think Cubby would've vetoed this. Let's not forget he put the mockers on the elephant stampede in TMWTGG.) I agree. The Train sequence sounds like it could've been one hell of an action sequence.
  • Posts: 12,837
    Samuel001 wrote:
    Germanlady wrote:
    The DB5 is a cynical ploy taken by the producers to ensure the general public that a new Bond is going to be as good as Goldfinger! IMO, seeing the DB5 in a Bond film (post TB i.e. GE, TND, CR) shows that the producers know they are on to a loser with a film. Roger Moore films didn't need it, neither did Timothy Dalton because they could carry the film without needing to pluck on the critics and casual film fans nostalgia for what they see as a good 60's spy film. The DB5 belongs to Goldfinger. Skyfall and future Bond films, get your own car!

    The DB5 is everthing but a cynical ploy - and certainly Dalton would have needed it more, IF what you said, was the case.

    Why exactly would Dalton have needed it more?

    Think about it. His Box Office takings were hardly the best.

    It was planned to appear in his third film, Bond 17, for the final time anyway.

    Wasn't the DB5 going to be blown up in China? I think it was. That to me sounds like a way of distancing Dalton from Connery, and not a ploy by EON to try and make Dalton more popular to the audience.


    And maybe this is just me, but I struggle to see Craig as tough when he pouts so much. It's as if he thinks he's on a catwalk.

    Would've loved to see the DB5 get blown up in some sort of epic chase, giving it one last appearence but also getting rid of the car. Dalton's 3rd film would've been so awesome.

    Other than Bond fighting robots (I seriously think Cubby would've vetoed this. Let's not forget he put the mockers on the elephant stampede in TMWTGG.) I agree. The Train sequence sounds like it could've been one hell of an action sequence.

    I also loved the sound of the motorbike chase on the great wall.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 5,993
    Samuel001 wrote:
    Germanlady wrote:
    The DB5 is a cynical ploy taken by the producers to ensure the general public that a new Bond is going to be as good as Goldfinger! IMO, seeing the DB5 in a Bond film (post TB i.e. GE, TND, CR) shows that the producers know they are on to a loser with a film. Roger Moore films didn't need it, neither did Timothy Dalton because they could carry the film without needing to pluck on the critics and casual film fans nostalgia for what they see as a good 60's spy film. The DB5 belongs to Goldfinger. Skyfall and future Bond films, get your own car!

    The DB5 is everthing but a cynical ploy - and certainly Dalton would have needed it more, IF what you said, was the case.

    Why exactly would Dalton have needed it more?

    Think about it. His Box Office takings were hardly the best.

    It was planned to appear in his third film, Bond 17, for the final time anyway.

    Wasn't the DB5 going to be blown up in China? I think it was. That to me sounds like a way of distancing Dalton from Connery, and not a ploy by EON to try and make Dalton more popular to the audience.


    And maybe this is just me, but I struggle to see Craig as tough when he pouts so much. It's as if he thinks he's on a catwalk.

    Would've loved to see the DB5 get blown up in some sort of epic chase, giving it one last appearence but also getting rid of the car. Dalton's 3rd film would've been so awesome.

    Other than Bond fighting robots (I seriously think Cubby would've vetoed this. Let's not forget he put the mockers on the elephant stampede in TMWTGG.) I agree. The Train sequence sounds like it could've been one hell of an action sequence.

    First of all, the imbedded quotes look awesome.

    Second, robots? What?
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,333
    Here's some opinions....

    DB5 is awesome and I'm glad it's coming back in Skyfall.
    Brosnan is a great bond, should have started back in 87.
    Licence to Kill sucked, TLD was great.
    Clown Scene in Octopussy is great almost like a Mission Impossible type suspense.
    AVTAK is pretty good.
    Die Another Day was brilliant.
    Quantum of Solace was brilliant.

    there, argue over these humble opinions. <:-P
  • Murdock wrote:
    Here's some opinions....

    DB5 is awesome and I'm glad it's coming back in Skyfall.
    Brosnan is a great bond, should have started back in 87.
    Licence to Kill sucked, TLD was great.
    Clown Scene in Octopussy is great almost like a Mission Impossible type suspense.
    AVTAK is pretty good.
    Die Another Day was brilliant.
    Quantum of Solace was brilliant.

    there, argue over these humble opinions. <:-P

    1) Aston Martin is the second best car in the series (behind the Lotus in TSWLM). It's use in the GE-SF period is shambolic and nowt but a cheap stunt designed to draw in the public, not Bond fans per se.

    2) Brosnan is the second worst Bond in the series. He's good. But Connery, Moore, Dalton and Craig are just simply better. Would have been interesting to go back to after AVTAK with Brosnan, see how the series would have panned out. Think though Brosnan is too Moore-esque...the series needed a big change just to freshen things up and got it in Dalton.

    3) LTK is a cracking film, it really is. Miles better than what Criag was going for in QOS. TLD is great I completely agree.

    4) The clown scene is the most tense in the whole series. The panic and fear created by Moore is compunded by the clown costume because it showed he was desperate to get in the circus regardless. OP is just littered with great scenes...one of the best in the series.

    5) AVTAK is my soft spot. I love it personally, California girls was great and Zorin and Mayday were brilliant. The plot was good and interesting. Moore did great, just looked slightly old. Stacey sutton, though amazing to look at, was very poor acting.

    6) DAD = invisible car and CGI effects. Though to be honest, the PTS is alright and the rogue Bond bits are good. Iceland is just naff and the film suffers for trying to incorporate every previous Bond film in it.

    7) QOS is awful. Self-indulgent tripe from Dench and Craig, trying to be clever and develop there characters and relationship. LTK is far superior as a revenge film. The plot, about what is hideous and the villains are weak and the locations unexotic.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,333

    2) Brosnan is the second worst Bond in the series. He's good. But Connery, Moore, Dalton and Craig are just simply better. Would have been interesting to go back to after AVTAK with Brosnan, see how the series would have panned out. Think though Brosnan is too Moore-esque...the series needed a big change just to freshen things up and got it in Dalton.

    But that's not Brosnan's fault, He was very much like Dalton in GoldenEye. Purvis and Wade's horrible writing is what made him bad. He did the best with what he had. Purvis and Wade are to blame for the downfall in quality of the Brosnan films.

  • Murdock wrote:

    2) Brosnan is the second worst Bond in the series. He's good. But Connery, Moore, Dalton and Craig are just simply better. Would have been interesting to go back to after AVTAK with Brosnan, see how the series would have panned out. Think though Brosnan is too Moore-esque...the series needed a big change just to freshen things up and got it in Dalton.

    But that's not Brosnan's fault, He was very much like Dalton in GoldenEye. Purvis and Wade's horrible writing is what made him bad. He did the best with what he had. Purvis and Wade are to blame for the downfall in quality of the Brosnan films.

    Your view on Purvis and Wade hits the nail on the head so much! they really are awful and terrible
  • Posts: 12,837
    Murdock wrote:
    Here's some opinions....

    DB5 is awesome and I'm glad it's coming back in Skyfall.
    Brosnan is a great bond, should have started back in 87.
    Licence to Kill sucked, TLD was great.
    Clown Scene in Octopussy is great almost like a Mission Impossible type suspense.
    AVTAK is pretty good.
    Die Another Day was brilliant.
    Quantum of Solace was brilliant.

    there, argue over these humble opinions. <:-P

    this is all imo

    1- It WAS awesome, in GF and TB. Now it's overused and I'm unhappy it's back.

    2- Brosnan is a great Bond, but Dalton is better, so no.

    3- [-( TLD was great, LTK is the greatest film of all time.

    4- That is a great scene yeah.

    5- It was ok. Moore was too old and Mayday sucked.

    6- No it wasn't. It was good up until Icarus was revealed. THEN things really went downhill and the film turns to crap.

    7- No, it really wasn't. It was god damn awful. The very worst in the series, not sure why you hate LTK but like this, since in alot of ways this was a Bournier version of LTK.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    edited April 2012 Posts: 16,333
    Not sure why you hate LTK but like this, since in alot of ways this was a Bournier version of LTK.

    I dislike Licence to Kill because it's boring and weak. And the fact it has too much gore. Exploding head, Impaled bodies and winking fish isn't a bond movie, it's a mess. The things I do like about it is Q, he saved the film where it was at it's worst.

    Bournier version of LTK? not really QoS was about Bond figuring out who quantum was, not getting revenge.
    Felix wasn't mangled to death in Casino Royale so it isn't the same.
  • Posts: 12,837
    Murdock wrote:
    Not sure why you hate LTK but like this, since in alot of ways this was a Bournier version of LTK.

    I dislike Licence to Kill because it's boring and weak. And the fact it has too much gore. Exploding head, Impaled bodies and winking fish isn't a bond movie, it's a mess. The things I do like about it is Q, he saved the film where it was at it's worst.

    Did we watch the same film?
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,333
    The film drags badly in between action sequences, PTS, boring wedding party, nothing until the Factory shootout, then even more fluff until the battle underwater, then the horrible bar fight then nothing until the climax. Licence to Kill is one of the most overrated Bond film out there, I'll gladly take QoS and DAD over it. IMO
  • Posts: 11,425
    Although a big fan of Dalton I do feel that his defenders go a bit far in trying to make out that LTK was a series high-point. It has some good scenes and Dalton is great as Bond, but overall it is not a classic installment IMO. I actually see it as the start of everything going wrong - the tedious 'rogue' storylines and insistence that Bond must have some personal motivation in every mission. This has now formed the basis of GE, TWINE, DUD and QoS...
  • Posts: 12,837
    Getafix wrote:
    Although a big fan of Dalton I do feel that his defenders go a bit far in trying to make out that LTK was a series high-point. It has some good scenes and Dalton is great as Bond, but overall it is not a classic installment IMO. I actually see it as the start of everything going wrong - the tedious 'rogue' storylines and insistence that Bond must have some personal motivation in every mission. This has now formed the basis of GE, TWINE, DUD and QoS...

    Except this was the 1st time this happened, so it was fresh and original back then. Now it would be more original to make it NOT personal.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 5,993
    Getafix wrote:
    Although a big fan of Dalton I do feel that his defenders go a bit far in trying to make out that LTK was a series high-point. It has some good scenes and Dalton is great as Bond, but overall it is not a classic installment IMO. I actually see it as the start of everything going wrong - the tedious 'rogue' storylines and insistence that Bond must have some personal motivation in every mission. This has now formed the basis of GE, TWINE, DUD and QoS...

    Except this was the 1st time this happened, so it was fresh and original back then. Now it would be more original to make it NOT personal.

    Great point. That would be refreshing for Bond 24.

    Arguably, every film since LTK has had a personal dimension for Bond--either it's personal from the beginning (LTK, TWINE, DAD, QoS), or it becomes personal (GE, TND, CR). Isn't part of being a double-O that he doesn't take killing personally?
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    echo wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    Although a big fan of Dalton I do feel that his defenders go a bit far in trying to make out that LTK was a series high-point. It has some good scenes and Dalton is great as Bond, but overall it is not a classic installment IMO. I actually see it as the start of everything going wrong - the tedious 'rogue' storylines and insistence that Bond must have some personal motivation in every mission. This has now formed the basis of GE, TWINE, DUD and QoS...

    Except this was the 1st time this happened, so it was fresh and original back then. Now it would be more original to make it NOT personal.

    Great point. That would be refreshing for Bond 24.

    Arguably, every film since LTK has had a personal dimension for Bond--either it's personal from the beginning (LTK, TWINE, DAD, QoS), or it becomes personal (GE, TND, CR). Isn't part of being a double-O that he doesn't take killing personally?

    I love that aspect of the films, having Bond personally affected and showing humanity again. And part of Bond's struggles in the books was the morals involved with his killing, and at times he was broken by it. That's why I wish the movies catered more to the Fleming novels.
  • I
    echo wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    Although a big fan of Dalton I do feel that his defenders go a bit far in trying to make out that LTK was a series high-point. It has some good scenes and Dalton is great as Bond, but overall it is not a classic installment IMO. I actually see it as the start of everything going wrong - the tedious 'rogue' storylines and insistence that Bond must have some personal motivation in every mission. This has now formed the basis of GE, TWINE, DUD and QoS...

    Except this was the 1st time this happened, so it was fresh and original back then. Now it would be more original to make it NOT personal.

    Great point. That would be refreshing for Bond 24.

    Arguably, every film since LTK has had a personal dimension for Bond--either it's personal from the beginning (LTK, TWINE, DAD, QoS), or it becomes personal (GE, TND, CR). Isn't part of being a double-O that he doesn't take killing personally?

    I love that aspect of the films, having Bond personally affected and showing humanity again. And part of Bond's struggles in the books was the morals involved with his killing, and at times he was broken by it. That's why I wish the movies catered more to the Fleming novels.

    In the series, there have been three deaths that have had a significant impact in one way or another: Tracy, Della (and the maiming of Felix) and Vesper. These deaths have influenced, one way or another, the actions either throughout the same film or in the following film in DAF, LTK and QOS, respectively. They have all treated revenge in a slightly different way. DAF gets revenge out the way pretty quick and with the emotion seeming to be focused mainly on killing Blofeld, not with Tracy in mind. LTK, on the other hand, the death is the plot driver and arguably, Bond shows anger throughout the film and the actions are revenge driven. In QOS, there is an undercurrent of revenge to Bond's actions though this is only highlighted by Mathis and at the end (he only dropped the necklace once he had got what he wanted).
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,459
    echo wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    Although a big fan of Dalton I do feel that his defenders go a bit far in trying to make out that LTK was a series high-point. It has some good scenes and Dalton is great as Bond, but overall it is not a classic installment IMO. I actually see it as the start of everything going wrong - the tedious 'rogue' storylines and insistence that Bond must have some personal motivation in every mission. This has now formed the basis of GE, TWINE, DUD and QoS...

    Except this was the 1st time this happened, so it was fresh and original back then. Now it would be more original to make it NOT personal.

    Great point. That would be refreshing for Bond 24.

    Arguably, every film since LTK has had a personal dimension for Bond--either it's personal from the beginning (LTK, TWINE, DAD, QoS), or it becomes personal (GE, TND, CR). Isn't part of being a double-O that he doesn't take killing personally?

    I love that aspect of the films, having Bond personally affected and showing humanity again. And part of Bond's struggles in the books was the morals involved with his killing, and at times he was broken by it. That's why I wish the movies catered more to the Fleming novels.

    I agree with 0Brady and Royale (hope you don't mind the name shortening!). I want to see some humanity in the man (I've read the books, too) - I do not want a robo Bond or Arnold clone or one dimensional Bond. I want it balanced, and I am glad there is a lighter side to Skyfall (from what we know). But keep the human touches and moments that keep Bond more fully developed than other action heroes. Please.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited May 2012 Posts: 5,993
    echo wrote:
    Getafix wrote:
    Although a big fan of Dalton I do feel that his defenders go a bit far in trying to make out that LTK was a series high-point. It has some good scenes and Dalton is great as Bond, but overall it is not a classic installment IMO. I actually see it as the start of everything going wrong - the tedious 'rogue' storylines and insistence that Bond must have some personal motivation in every mission. This has now formed the basis of GE, TWINE, DUD and QoS...

    Except this was the 1st time this happened, so it was fresh and original back then. Now it would be more original to make it NOT personal.

    Great point. That would be refreshing for Bond 24.

    Arguably, every film since LTK has had a personal dimension for Bond--either it's personal from the beginning (LTK, TWINE, DAD, QoS), or it becomes personal (GE, TND, CR). Isn't part of being a double-O that he doesn't take killing personally?

    I love that aspect of the films, having Bond personally affected and showing humanity again. And part of Bond's struggles in the books was the morals involved with his killing, and at times he was broken by it. That's why I wish the movies catered more to the Fleming novels.

    I agree with 0Brady and Royale (hope you don't mind the name shortening!). I want to see some humanity in the man (I've read the books, too) - I do not want a robo Bond or Arnold clone or one dimensional Bond. I want it balanced, and I am glad there is a lighter side to Skyfall (from what we know). But keep the human touches and moments that keep Bond more fully developed than other action heroes. Please.

    I agree with this. The more Fleming, the better. And something like TLD handles it very well ("If he fires me I'll thank him for it"...and then the plot moves on.) I am tired of the turncoat agent plot twist--please give us something new, Eon!
  • 002002
    Posts: 581
    Murdock wrote:
    Here's some opinions....

    DB5 is awesome and I'm glad it's coming back in Skyfall.
    Brosnan is a great bond, should have started back in 87.
    Licence to Kill sucked, TLD was great.
    Clown Scene in Octopussy is great almost like a Mission Impossible type suspense.
    AVTAK is pretty good.
    Die Another Day was brilliant.
    Quantum of Solace was brilliant.

    there, argue over these humble opinions. <:-P

    1) Aston Martin is the second best car in the series (behind the Lotus in TSWLM). It's use in the GE-SF period is shambolic and nowt but a cheap stunt designed to draw in the public, not Bond fans per se.

    2) Brosnan is the second worst Bond in the series. He's good. But Connery, Moore, Dalton and Craig are just simply better. Would have been interesting to go back to after AVTAK with Brosnan, see how the series would have panned out. Think though Brosnan is too Moore-esque...the series needed a big change just to freshen things up and got it in Dalton.

    3) LTK is a cracking film, it really is. Miles better than what Criag was going for in QOS. TLD is great I completely agree.

    4) The clown scene is the most tense in the whole series. The panic and fear created by Moore is compunded by the clown costume because it showed he was desperate to get in the circus regardless. OP is just littered with great scenes...one of the best in the series.

    5) AVTAK is my soft spot. I love it personally, California girls was great and Zorin and Mayday were brilliant. The plot was good and interesting. Moore did great, just looked slightly old. Stacey sutton, though amazing to look at, was very poor acting.

    6) DAD = invisible car and CGI effects. Though to be honest, the PTS is alright and the rogue Bond bits are good. Iceland is just naff and the film suffers for trying to incorporate every previous Bond film in it.

    7) QOS is awful. Self-indulgent tripe from Dench and Craig, trying to be clever and develop there characters and relationship. LTK is far superior as a revenge film. The plot, about what is hideous and the villains are weak and the locations unexotic.

    1) Agreed..though the cameo in GE was fun with Xenia Onatopp

    2) nah Lazenby and Craig are the worst ones. the list goes from Good to Mediocre: Connery, Moore, Brosnan/Dalton, Lazenby, Craig....though i think that if Brosnan got better scripts he would have done very well as Bond

    3) Licence to kill is truly a great underrated bond adventure
    4) totally it was really good especially when Bond defused the bomb under a couple of seconds
    5) another underrated film better than Qantum of Solace or Die Another Day
    6) Die Another Day had a good strong half but failed when going to iceland- Brosnan does his best performace as Bond, Judi Dench, John Cleese and Rosmund Pike are the only good actors in it and the pre-title sequence is cool.

    7) almost everyone on Mi6 Forums knows my opinion of Qantum of Solace...the pimple on the arse of bond films...so ill save the typing space...
  • edited May 2012 Posts: 5
    Pierce Brosnan has the perfect Bond look.

    Whenever I think of Bond an image of Brosnan pops into my head. Even though Roger Moore is my favorite actor who has played 007.

    I agree with the statement back in the day that he was born for the role; he just fits it perfectly. I love GE, TND and to a lesser degree TWINE, I can look past its faults, but he would have benefited greatly from superior scripts.

    I'm sorry Signed_By_RogerMoore, I'm afraid I can't agree. Daniel Craig, although a fantastic actor, will never be a top Bond for me. Call me superficial, but he doesn't resemble the cinematic Bond I'm fond of, he looks more like a generic, blonde henchman to me.
  • Lancaster007Lancaster007 Shrublands Health Clinic, England
    Posts: 1,874
    0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 agree re Mathis - terrible mistake to make, a great actor and great character who would have made welcome appearances in other Bonds.

    I think Guy Hamilton was the worst director of Bonds - sure he got lucky with Goldfinger, but his other Bond films are dire (mmm, Tom Mankiewicz seems to have had a hand in the others!), and he also thought that Burt Reynolds would have made a good Bond?!!!
Sign In or Register to comment.