›

Controversial opinions about Bond films

1…373374376378379…705

Comments

  • BT3366BT3366
    Posts: 1,884
    GoldenGun wrote: »
    thelivingroyale wrote: »
    jobo wrote: »
    To say Dalton "didn't have an action physique" is a bit odd considering he did more of his own stunts than any other Bond actor...

    Yeah I loved all Dalton's action scenes including the fight scenes. You can tell it's actually him which really adds to how cool they are plus in every fight scene he seemed to struggle and be fighting for his life, which I really liked. He came across as badass and highly trained but still human and the way he seemed to struggle and go through the ringer every time, but still come out on top by the skin of his teeth, made them even cooler imo. The coreography wasn't as good as with Connery Lazenby and Craig but I never got the impression that he wasn't a badass, highly trained agent. He just came across as a realistic highly trained agent. That's why he was so great in general. He seemed like a real spy. All the others (except Lazenby who I think was the closest to the books) are at least a little bit larger than life which is cool but what makes Dalton special is that he took Bond, who isn't a realistic character at all, and bought a real sense of reality to it. He was perfect as the grizzled burnt out assassin and that's why he'll always be my favourite James Bond.

    @thelivingroyale You took the words rights out of my pocket ;)

    Spot on, Sir. I agree with every single word.

    I agree as well. Some of us who were there when Dalton debuted will likely always have this feeling as he represented something different for Bond even if it wasn't what the general public necessarily wanted at the time. And these still hold up well for me.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    My issue with Dalton is that you could often sense him acting. This shows particularly in LTK.
  • ForYourEyesOnlyForYourEyesOnly In the untained cradle of the heavens
    Posts: 1,984
    Agreed. He was a good thespian but he felt more like he acted Bond than he was Bond in some sequences, especially in LTK.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    ForYourEyesOnly wrote: »
    Agreed. He was a good thespian but he felt more like he acted Bond than he was Bond in some sequences, especially in LTK.

    I agree.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,565
    agreed
  • LudovicoLudovico
    Posts: 14,844
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    My issue with Dalton is that you could often sense him acting. This shows particularly in LTK.

    Yes and maybe that's one of the reasons why he was not popular at the time.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited October 2017 Posts: 23,883
    thelivingroyale wrote: »
    jobo wrote: »
    To say Dalton "didn't have an action physique" is a bit odd considering he did more of his own stunts than any other Bond actor...

    Yeah I loved all Dalton's action scenes including the fight scenes. You can tell it's actually him which really adds to how cool they are plus in every fight scene he seemed to struggle and be fighting for his life, which I really liked. He came across as badass and highly trained but still human and the way he seemed to struggle and go through the ringer every time, but still come out on top by the skin of his teeth, made them even cooler imo. The coreography wasn't as good as with Connery Lazenby and Craig but I never got the impression that he wasn't a badass, highly trained agent. He just came across as a realistic highly trained agent. That's why he was so great in general. He seemed like a real spy. All the others (except Lazenby who I think was the closest to the books) are at least a little bit larger than life which is cool but what makes Dalton special is that he took Bond, who isn't a realistic character at all, and bought a real sense of reality to it. He was perfect as the grizzled burnt out assassin and that's why he'll always be my favourite James Bond.
    Dalton is not my favourite because I like a little more extravagant fantasy & attitude in my Bond and in the films generally, but I otherwise agree with you. Dalton was easily the most 'human' of the Bond actors for me too. It makes his films quite unique, even though they have a typical Glen stamp on them otherwise. He didn't go for 'cool'. Rather he went for 'authentic' and 'real'.
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 7,988
    Dalton just did some parts really well, like the intrigue. When he's just saved by Sanches, and plants that seed about Krest. His fighting though, not so much, and his emotions go overboard at some points.

    Maybe not too controversial, but Davi si one of the most underrated villains in the series.

    and on a side note:
  • BT3366BT3366
    Posts: 1,884
    CommanderRoss wrote: »
    Dalton just did some parts really well, like the intrigue. When he's just saved by Sanches, and plants that seed about Krest. His fighting though, not so much, and his emotions go overboard at some points.

    Maybe not too controversial, but Davi si one of the most underrated villains in the series.

    and on a side note:

    Agreed, I've been saying he's underrated for years. There's a real sense of menace to him and at the same time that sense of loyalty grounds him a bit more than the many megalomaniacs who are insane and therefore automatically qualify as evil with little else to intrigue about them.

    Davi and Dalton have are some of the best Bond-baddie chemistry in the series. It always annoys me when people dismiss the character as merely a drug dealer.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    The only likable Bond villain in the film series is Dr No.
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    The only likable Bond villain in the film series is Dr No.

    Christopher Lee might be one too.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    He could, except he isn t very nice to Andrea.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,565
    Yep @BT3366 — I’d go so far and say that Davi elevated Tim’s performance
  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    Davi probably gives the best performance in LTK.
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    He could, except he isn t very nice to Andrea.

    Well Dr No did try to drown Honey.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Yes, true. I guess they are both nasty after all.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,565
    Sanchez is very charming. But in a blink he could be clawing at your face. One of my favourite villains
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 3,985
    ForYourEyesOnly wrote: »
    Agreed. He was a good thespian but he felt more like he acted Bond than he was Bond in some sequences, especially in LTK.

    Yeah you can 'see' his acting in a lot of scenes.

    Beats me why some people think he gives a good performance in LTK.
  • RoadphillRoadphill United Kingdom
    Posts: 984
    Sanchez is one of the best villains in the series. He is by far the best thing about LTK.
  • RoadphillRoadphill United Kingdom
    Posts: 984
    Here is a controversial opinion. I have done a big Bond rewatch recently and just finished the Connery years. I actually think Goldfinger may slip in my rankings.
  • CrzChris4CrzChris4
    Posts: 462
    I've never minded Tim's more theatrical approach to the role, but I definitely think he played off Davi (as opposed to the villains in TLD) much better. I guess I'm in the camp that enjoys his LTK performance more.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,565
    @Roadphill, I think GF goes up in my recent viewing (already high, I just loved the imagery, all class), and TB, still loved, may have a slight stumble... Either way, both are in my tops...
  • ToTheRightToTheRight
    Posts: 15,842
    peter wrote: »
    @Roadphill, I think GF goes up in my recent viewing (already high, I just loved the imagery, all class), and TB, still loved, may have a slight stumble... Either way, both are in my tops...

    GF is always in my top 5 often at number 1. Slipped to second place for me, because FRWL has that extra edge and atmosphere. I always felt the first four films really captured Fleming's world, with a dash of humor added. GF transitions into cinematic Bond territory, but still keeps things toned down. By YOLT it's cinematic Bond all the way.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,565
    yes @Birdleson, for all it's faults, GF is all class. The iconic imagery I'd say is Top Five of the entire 20th century of films? Top Three, even? Lawrence of Arabia on camel across the desert? Luke fighting Darth? Bond strapped to a table, legs spread with a laser heading for his groin?
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,565
    Agreed, at least top ten to fifteen then... and, since the 21st C has been pretty lacklustre with iconic imagery, Top Ten of all time. (I love GF, CASABLANCA, NOSFERATU, GOODFELLAS, PULP FICTION, THE WIZARD OF OZ, TAXI DRIVER, RAGING BULL, INDIANA JONES, STAR WARS, JAWS... but, GOLDFINGER's with the big players, for sure)
  • ToTheRightToTheRight
    Posts: 15,842
    Birdleson wrote: »
    No question it's up there so far as iconic images. But then you start thinking about THE WIZARD OF OZ, CASABLANCA, THE GODFATHER and some others and you realize that the competition is pretty heavy at the top. But GF holds it's own: PTS, Title Song/Credits, Painted Jill, Odd Job, laser table, golf game, Pussy Galore, Aston Martin/ejector seat, Q scene,all iconic and into the public psyche beyond our sect.

    I couldn't agree more. I'd say GF easily falls in line with the all time classics: CASABLANCA, THE GODFATHER, CITIZEN KANE, etc. It really set the Bond standard for decades to come. It's legacy can't be over emphasized.
  • jobojobo
    edited October 2017 Posts: 7,501
    The latter half of Goldfinger is downright boring! Here is a controversial opinion:

    Goldfinger has the least engaging villain's scheme of all the Bonds.

    Personaly I don't mind if the guy gets his gold. Why should I care?
  • barryt007barryt007
    Posts: 19,339
    jobo wrote: »
    The latter half of Goldfinger is downright boring! Here is a controversial opinion:

    Goldfinger has the least engaging villain's scheme of all the Bonds.

    Personaly I don't mind if the guy gets his gold. Why should I care?

    Totally right,Connery is on auto-pilot and is too damn cocky for my liking.

  • BAIN123BAIN123
    Posts: 11,189
    I think Connery is "on autopilot" much more in DAF.

    "A vast supply of diamonds manipulated by an expert in light retraction".
  • barryt007barryt007
    Posts: 19,339
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    I think Connery is "on autopilot" much more in DAF.

    "A vast supply of diamonds manipulated by an expert in light retraction".

    He was indeed,yep.

  • jobojobo
    Posts: 7,501
    barryt007 wrote: »
    jobo wrote: »
    The latter half of Goldfinger is downright boring! Here is a controversial opinion:

    Goldfinger has the least engaging villain's scheme of all the Bonds.

    Personaly I don't mind if the guy gets his gold. Why should I care?

    Totally right,Connery is on auto-pilot and is too damn cocky for my liking.


    And the plot is just... meh..

    The locations are sterile and uninspiring as well. A far cry from so many of the exotic finales we have gotten used to.
Sign In or Register to comment.