50 years from now, will revisionist Bond historians upgrade or downgrade various actors who played

135

Comments

  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,694
    acoppola wrote:
    I may be one of the few who liked QOS. Who knows. I may prefer it after seeing Skyfall.
    We are a small group...
  • Posts: 11,425
    chrisisall wrote:
    acoppola wrote:
    I may be one of the few who liked QOS. Who knows. I may prefer it after seeing Skyfall.
    We are a small group...

    But growing! ;)

  • Posts: 2,341
    Maybe one day Dalton will be fully appreciated. Laz may be "love or hate" but Dalton is the forgotten Bond...
    His films were good. In 1987-89 after 12 years of Roger Moore's light hearted Bond fans were not ready for the harder edged Bond.
    \Now with Craig becoming more and more popular, maybe reviewers will look back at Dalton and appreciate his portrayal more.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,694
    OHMSS69 wrote:
    Now with Craig becoming more and more popular, maybe reviewers will look back at Dalton and appreciate his portrayal more.

    Thankfully, it's already happening.

    http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/entertainment/articles/2012-11/08/timothy-dalton-the-best-james-bond-007
  • edited November 2012 Posts: 11,189
    Dalton in LTK still doesn't wow me sadly. He does well but and gives mainly good performances but there's just something he lacks - and I've re-visited both Kill and LD recently.

    I admire Dalts and I appreciate his take (the guy at least deserves to be more appreciated) but I just enjoy most of the other actors more.

    Truth be told I doubt Dalton will ever have the universal popularity of Connery/Moore/Brosnan and Craig BUT TLD still holds up pretty well. In contrast LTK - despite its good qualities - feels somewhat dated and cheap.
  • acoppolaacoppola London Ealing not far from where Bob Simmons lived
    Posts: 1,243
    OHMSS69 wrote:
    Maybe one day Dalton will be fully appreciated. Laz may be "love or hate" but Dalton is the forgotten Bond...
    His films were good. In 1987-89 after 12 years of Roger Moore's light hearted Bond fans were not ready for the harder edged Bond.
    \Now with Craig becoming more and more popular, maybe reviewers will look back at Dalton and appreciate his portrayal more.

    I don't know about Dalton who is gaining a resurgence. The Dalton films stand up to the test of time and his performance is in line with what we are seeing in the newer films. A real Bond fan will look at all the Bond films.

    Ironically, I am shocked that I hardly hear Brosnan mentioned by the popular dinosaur media. He did 4 films and yet tome it lately feels like he never existed.

    Dalton would always be mentioned even in a sometimes negative way during Brosnan's era. So even that bad publicity did him good.

    Dalton is a controversial Bond. And controversy is a good thing. The world has caught up with him.

  • Posts: 11,189
    acoppola wrote:
    OHMSS69 wrote:
    Maybe one day Dalton will be fully appreciated. Laz may be "love or hate" but Dalton is the forgotten Bond...
    His films were good. In 1987-89 after 12 years of Roger Moore's light hearted Bond fans were not ready for the harder edged Bond.
    \Now with Craig becoming more and more popular, maybe reviewers will look back at Dalton and appreciate his portrayal more.

    I don't know about Dalton who is gaining a resurgence. The Dalton films stand up to the test of time and his performance is in line with what we are seeing in the newer films. A real Bond fan will look at all the Bond films.

    Ironically, I am shocked that I hardly hear Brosnan mentioned by the popular dinosaur media. He did 4 films and yet tome it lately feels like he never existed.

    Dalton would always be mentioned even in a sometimes negative way during Brosnan's era. So even that bad publicity did him good.

    Dalton is a controversial Bond. And controversy is a good thing. The world has caught up with him.

    Sadly I admit Brosnan's films don't hold up that well. They are from a cheesey era where action/explosions took hold. I'd still say he's fairly popular both as Bond and as a star.

    I think a lot of people - me included - now realise the massive cracks that are present in his films. I still enjoy Brosnan but even the man himself implied most of his films are forgettable (in the EoN documentary he couldn't remember which came first out of TND and TWINE - GE was the only one he remembered clearly).
  • acoppolaacoppola London Ealing not far from where Bob Simmons lived
    Posts: 1,243
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Dalton in LTK still doesn't wow me sadly. He does well but and gives mainly good performances but there's just something he lacks - and I've re-visited both Kill and LD recently.

    I admire Dalts and I appreciate his take (the guy at least deserves to be more appreciated) but I just enjoy most of the other actors more.

    Truth be told I doubt Dalton will ever have the universal popularity of Connery/Moore/Brosnan and Craig BUT TLD still holds up pretty well. In contrast LTK - despite its good qualities - feels somewhat dated and cheap.

    Psychologically LTK is not dated. Technically all Bond films from the 1960's, 70's or 80's are dated too. To a new audience they will gravitate more to a Bond of their generation.

    There are aspects of Goldfinger that are dated. But I do not watch the film for it's technology. Some human psychology never changes and Bond is great with that.

    But the dialogue is not and that along with Bond's ability to adapt to situations will never date.

    @Bain123 LTK has a phenomenal villain and we see a dirty rogue Bond. Scenes like where Bond absails down the building to lay plastic explosive are brilliant. One of the best Q scenes.

    Dalton's Bond has many layers in that film and is more fleshed out.

  • acoppolaacoppola London Ealing not far from where Bob Simmons lived
    Posts: 1,243
    BAIN123 wrote:
    acoppola wrote:
    OHMSS69 wrote:
    Maybe one day Dalton will be fully appreciated. Laz may be "love or hate" but Dalton is the forgotten Bond...
    His films were good. In 1987-89 after 12 years of Roger Moore's light hearted Bond fans were not ready for the harder edged Bond.
    \Now with Craig becoming more and more popular, maybe reviewers will look back at Dalton and appreciate his portrayal more.

    I don't know about Dalton who is gaining a resurgence. The Dalton films stand up to the test of time and his performance is in line with what we are seeing in the newer films. A real Bond fan will look at all the Bond films.

    Ironically, I am shocked that I hardly hear Brosnan mentioned by the popular dinosaur media. He did 4 films and yet tome it lately feels like he never existed.

    Dalton would always be mentioned even in a sometimes negative way during Brosnan's era. So even that bad publicity did him good.

    Dalton is a controversial Bond. And controversy is a good thing. The world has caught up with him.

    Sadly I admit Brosnan's films don't hold up that well. They are from a cheesey era where action/explosions took hold. I'd still say he's fairly popular both as Bond and as a star.

    I think a lot of people - me included - now realise the massive cracks that are present in his films. I still enjoy Brosnan but even the man himself implied most of his films are forgettable (in the EoN documentary he couldn't remember which came first out of TND and TWINE - GE was the only one he remembered clearly).

    I was just watching Haphazard stuff and he sums up the progressive decline of the Brosnan era. Man, but the opportunities they wasted and we are talking about most of his films having budgets of in excess of $100 million.

    I see no excuse how they F'd up with that kind of financial support. Dalton's films were less than a third of those budgets and hold up better.

    Brosnan had such good potential but he became action man Bond and less the cerebral Bond. His best moments were so short and the mediocre went on for ages. A real shame, as he had the right qualities but they tied him into the please everyone category Bond which is a road to nowhere.

  • edited November 2012 Posts: 11,189
    acoppola wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Dalton in LTK still doesn't wow me sadly. He does well but and gives mainly good performances but there's just something he lacks - and I've re-visited both Kill and LD recently.

    I admire Dalts and I appreciate his take (the guy at least deserves to be more appreciated) but I just enjoy most of the other actors more.

    Truth be told I doubt Dalton will ever have the universal popularity of Connery/Moore/Brosnan and Craig BUT TLD still holds up pretty well. In contrast LTK - despite its good qualities - feels somewhat dated and cheap.

    Psychologically LTK is not dated. Technically all Bond films from the 1960's, 70's or 80's are dated too. To a new audience they will gravitate more to a Bond of their generation.

    There are aspects of Goldfinger that are dated. But I do not watch the film for it's technology. Some human psychology never changes and Bond is great with that.

    But the dialogue is not and that along with Bond's ability to adapt to situations will never date.

    @Bain123 LTK has a phenomenal villain and we see a dirty rogue Bond. Scenes like where Bond absails down the building to lay plastic explosive are brilliant. One of the best Q scenes.

    Dalton's Bond has many layers in that film and is more fleshed out.

    Agreed the film has a good story but it LOOKS cheap and nasty a lot of the time. Film's like FRWL, OHMSS, FYEO, TLD and even SF could still be serious but had a bit of style.

    Seriously, I used to consider LTK as one of the best movies but last year watched it alongside OHMSS and the flaws showed.

    Kill largely feels like it should be on TV. The poor production values/cinematography, overly casual costumes and American feel don't help. I can see why it divides people. TLD is the better of the two.

    I agree Davi is superb though.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,694
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Dalton in LTK still doesn't wow me sadly. He does well but and gives mainly good performances but there's just something he lacks -
    And I know what it is.*
    Let me take you back to 1987. I'm sitting in the theatre, and Bond has just squeezed the life out of the balloon that says 'death to spies' on it, and he hops a hedge & nearly draws down on a little girl. Well, W. T. F. That was not MY Bond! MY Bond is a hero that would never make such a stupid mistake, and more so because he'd not be so EMOTIONAL about it! Who IS this guy?
    Later I read Fleming & tried his movies again & found out who this guy Dalton was- the real deal.

    *He lacks cinema suave.
  • acoppolaacoppola London Ealing not far from where Bob Simmons lived
    edited November 2012 Posts: 1,243
    BAIN123 wrote:
    acoppola wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Dalton in LTK still doesn't wow me sadly. He does well but and gives mainly good performances but there's just something he lacks - and I've re-visited both Kill and LD recently.

    I admire Dalts and I appreciate his take (the guy at least deserves to be more appreciated) but I just enjoy most of the other actors more.

    Truth be told I doubt Dalton will ever have the universal popularity of Connery/Moore/Brosnan and Craig BUT TLD still holds up pretty well. In contrast LTK - despite its good qualities - feels somewhat dated and cheap.

    Psychologically LTK is not dated. Technically all Bond films from the 1960's, 70's or 80's are dated too. To a new audience they will gravitate more to a Bond of their generation.

    There are aspects of Goldfinger that are dated. But I do not watch the film for it's technology. Some human psychology never changes and Bond is great with that.

    But the dialogue is not and that along with Bond's ability to adapt to situations will never date.

    @Bain123 LTK has a phenomenal villain and we see a dirty rogue Bond. Scenes like where Bond absails down the building to lay plastic explosive are brilliant. One of the best Q scenes.

    Dalton's Bond has many layers in that film and is more fleshed out.

    Agreed the film has a good story but it LOOKS cheap and nasty a lot of the time. Film's like FRWL, OHMSS, FYEO and TLD.

    Seriously, I used to consider LTK as one of the best movies but last year watched it alongside OHMSS.

    The poor production values/cinematography, overly casual costumes and American feel don't help and I can see why it divides people. TLD is the better of the two.

    I agree Davi is superb though.

    LTK's production has some beautiful places and the look of the hotel as well as casino is classic Bond. But what LTK lacks in budget, it makes up for in atmosphere. It keeps you interested and you actually see Bond doing his job and being a spy.

    It has a lot of aces and suits the Fleming novel atmosphere. OHMSS is made in an era where money was no object. But profit margins were so tight in the late 80's. A sad era where the film studio wanted to make Bond for as cheaply as possible.

    Despite TLD being a hit, they cut the next film's budget. It had to be in Mexico or not made at all in the LTK documentary.

    And Dalton gives a menacing performance as Bond. He shows how brutal Bond can be and we see more of his nastier unhinged side. I like that and knowing Dalton wanted to take it further but was restrained by Glen makes me see even more possibility not less.

    Cinematically Dalton hold the film. When he goes into traditional Bond tux mode, it makes a huge impact. I love his resignation scene and the ominous music.

    Oh and the gunbarrel music is damn dark and ominous. This is a standout Bond for me.

    Now what would a Craig or Brosnan film look like on a tiny budget? QOS had a budget of $135 million and does not show it anywhere.

    The story is what counts for me and I like James Bond to feel rich and textured with different aspects of his persona.

    Davi stands out because of him and Dalton really working together to do so. Dalton wanted him to be intimidating and show how Bond's reality is not a bed of roses or a bed full of women.

    The film has the classic Fleming Sex, sadism. snobbery and death all over it. And it has a shark scene which is classic Bond. No shark, no classic Bond!:)

  • edited November 2012 Posts: 11,189
    Err... I'm not convinced. True the story is good but it just feels too "TV movie-ish" at times for me. The tone is uneven too. The bar fight doesn't feel like it belongs in a Bond movie and Dalton just seems (to me) like he's trying too hard in a few scenes. Also the casino just looks cheap (compare it to earlier films like TB and DN and then later films like GE and CR).

    There's some good stuff in there but I don't think it holds up that well. It just lacks that cinematic quality for the most part.
  • acoppolaacoppola London Ealing not far from where Bob Simmons lived
    Posts: 1,243
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Err... I'm not convinced. True the story is good but it just feels too "TV movie-ish" at times for me. The tone is uneven too. The bar fight doesn't feel like it belongs in a Bond movie and Dalton just seems (to me) like he's trying too hard in a few scenes. Also the casino just looks cheap (compare it to earlier films like TB and DN and then later films like GE and CR).

    That's its problem. It lacks that cinematic quality for the most part.

    Yes, but all Bond films have a weak scene. But you have to see the film as an overall piece. A film needs to be appraised in it's context and it still has the Bond feel. TV movie with Panavision cameras I do not think so.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,694
    acoppola wrote:

    It [LTK] has a lot of aces and suits the Fleming novel atmosphere. OHMSS is made in an era where money was no object.
    Some of the Bond movies with big budgets seem less Flemingesque for it IMO.
    As much as I like TND, it suffers the YOLT & TSWLM syndrome of having to many pounds sterling to play with.

    I order that from now on, ALL Bond movies shall have a $75,000,000 cap on production costs.
    Creativity & fine scripts will make up the rest.
  • edited November 2012 Posts: 11,189
    acoppola wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Err... I'm not convinced. True the story is good but it just feels too "TV movie-ish" at times for me. The tone is uneven too. The bar fight doesn't feel like it belongs in a Bond movie and Dalton just seems (to me) like he's trying too hard in a few scenes. Also the casino just looks cheap (compare it to earlier films like TB and DN and then later films like GE and CR).

    That's its problem. It lacks that cinematic quality for the most part.

    Yes, but all Bond films have a weak scene. But you have to see the film as an overall piece. A film needs to be appraised in it's context and it still has the Bond feel. TV movie with Panavision cameras I do not think so.

    But it does though. Some of the early shots in and around Miami really are quite poor.

    There are bits and pieces like I said that are good. I liked the whole nod to LALD during the scenes in the aquirium and I think the basis of Bond sewing seeds of doubt into the villain's mind is actually is good but it should have been done with more style.

    I think the overly-American manner the film has doesn't really help things either. The "good cop, bad cop" scene when Kelifer interrogates Sanchez is boarline laughable due to the former's over-acting.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,694
    BAIN123 wrote:
    There's some good stuff in there but I don't think it holds up that well. It just lacks that cinematic quality for the most part.
    This illusion is created by two things: Florida & Mexico are similar so not as world-encompassing as other Bonds, and Michael Kamen's standard action movie score. A few more scenes in the UK (with the LOVELY Caroline Bliss) and a John Barry score would have made it all seem right as rain.
  • edited November 2012 Posts: 11,189
    chrisisall wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    There's some good stuff in there but I don't think it holds up that well. It just lacks that cinematic quality for the most part.
    This illusion is created by two things: Florida & Mexico are similar so not as world-encompassing as other Bonds, and Michael Kamen's standard action movie score. A few more scenes in the UK (with the LOVELY Caroline Bliss) and a John Barry score would have made it all seem right as rain.

    I always considered Caroline Bliss as the worst MP by far. True she was attractive but she couldn't act to save her life.

    Not going to get into that argument here though ;)

    I don't really have a problem with the Kamen score (I actually quite like it) but I think the film certainly should have had better cinematography.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,694
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Some of the early shots in and around Miami really are quite poor.
    In all candour, yeah, some of the Florida stuff was kind of Miami Vice-ish, but that's more a thing of when & where this movie was made than lack of cinematic professionalism IMO.

  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,694
    BAIN123 wrote:
    I always considered Caroline Bliss as the worst MP by far.
    For that bit of Moneypenny blasphemy I sentence you to marry Samantha Bond.
  • edited November 2012 Posts: 11,189
    chrisisall wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    I always considered Caroline Bliss as the worst MP by far.
    For that bit of Moneypenny blasphemy I sentence you to marry Samantha Bond.

    Fine. I'd happily do that. I always liked her in the part and was trying desperately to get her autograph at the SF premier (sadly did not succeed).
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited November 2012 Posts: 17,694
    Actually, I like Samantha a lot (but not her shorter hairstyle).
    However, Caroline's MP was the perfect sexy-nerd-as-secretary/research whiz IMO. And I'd GLADLY look at her... Barry Manilow collection... anytime. ;)
  • edited November 2012 Posts: 11,189
    chrisisall wrote:
    Actually, I like Samantha a lot (but not her shorter hairstyle).
    However, Caroline's MP was the perfect sexy-nerd-as-secretary/research whiz IMO. And I'd GLADLY look at her... Barry Manilow collection... anytime. ;)

    I thought she was too "school-girly".

    Oh god the Barry Manilow remark made me cringe - especially how she takes off her glasses at the same time.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited November 2012 Posts: 17,694
    BAIN123 wrote:
    I thought she was too "school-girly".
    Like that would be a bad MP trait...
    Oh man, you GOTTA read what she's really saying in that scene!!! :O
    "I didn't know you were such a music lover, James. Any time you want to, drop by and we can do the horizontal mambo."
  • Posts: 11,189
    Her and Dalton singing along to Barry Manilow? No thanks. Id rather re-watch Pierce Brosnan rape SOS. At least that was funny :))
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,694
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Her and Dalton singing along to Barry Manilow?
    Not sing Manilow, SHAG!!!

    I give up....
    @-)
  • acoppolaacoppola London Ealing not far from where Bob Simmons lived
    edited November 2012 Posts: 1,243
    BAIN123 wrote:
    acoppola wrote:
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Err... I'm not convinced. True the story is good but it just feels too "TV movie-ish" at times for me. The tone is uneven too. The bar fight doesn't feel like it belongs in a Bond movie and Dalton just seems (to me) like he's trying too hard in a few scenes. Also the casino just looks cheap (compare it to earlier films like TB and DN and then later films like GE and CR).

    That's its problem. It lacks that cinematic quality for the most part.

    Yes, but all Bond films have a weak scene. But you have to see the film as an overall piece. A film needs to be appraised in it's context and it still has the Bond feel. TV movie with Panavision cameras I do not think so.

    But it does though. Some of the early shots in and around Miami really are quite poor.

    There are bits and pieces like I said that are good. I liked the whole nod to LALD during the scenes in the aquirium and I think the basis of Bond sewing seeds of doubt into the villain's mind is actually is good but it should have been done with more style.

    I think the overly-American manner the film has doesn't really help things either. The "good cop, bad cop" scene when Kelifer interrogates Sanchez is boarline laughable due to the former's over-acting.

    The actor playing kelifer appeared in a David Lynch film years later. He was OTT but at the same time, he captured the essence of how easily he could be bought. I mean it is a funny line when he goes "Why Sanchez, not even one of your famous 1 million dollar bribes will get you out of here!". That is set up for Sanchez's reply of "2".

    I think the cinematography outside was fantastic. The TV movie feel I do not see. For starters all tv movies from that era were shot in 4:3 aspect ratio. LTK is 2:35 aspect ratio and widescreen.

    The underwater photography was great and they used one of the best underwater cameramen in the world.

    All old Bond films have scenes which look like they are shot in a studio. But LTK looks like a mix of a 60's, 70's and late 80's Bond film. It still looks Bond and how could it not considering we have the same director who did 3 Roger Moore movies.

    It is the most Latin feel Bond movie ever. And I like it for that. And where people get Miami Vice from I have no idea. I did notice more references to Scarface in terms of the brutality.

    I love LTK because it is a very medallion man style Bond film. When Bond says to Pam " We're south of the border. It's a man's world!". That is a great line and shows that PC does not exist everywhere. I liked that touch in the film. It was not being sexist but matter of fact.

    And the scenes with how they price the cocaine via a tv channel is amazing. That is so Bondy. I think the blatant cocaine talk also knocked the film's rating up in the UK.

    The actual Bond film I think looks the least Bond is TWINE. It does not capture the beauty very well of any of it's locations. LTK does. Mexico looks great!

    I actually think LTK has a look in parts that remind me of Dr No. Not in an exact way, but the sense of how you see Bond hopping around to get information.

    And you cannot compare it's look @Bain123 to OHMSS. It was not supposed to have that look. Look at how different DAF looks 2 years later?. You could argue that it looks cheap in comparisson. But any Bond that serves the story is always good Bond!

    Think it over @Bain123 LTK is a classic and you won't get another Bond like it. Appreciate it for what it is. Cubby's last film too. It is the end of an era and it ranks high with me.



  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,901
    BAIN123 wrote:
    In contrast LTK - despite its good qualities - feels somewhat dated and cheap.

    That's how I feel towards GE. It's all looks so grey and bland and that CGI shot of the Earth looks dated even by 1995 standards. TND which is only 2 years it's junior, has aged much better.

  • edited November 2012 Posts: 11,189
    Personally I think the "TV movie" feel of the film is pretty blatant. Perhaps that was the idea though at the time given how popular Miami Vice was. I remember reading that they deliberately tried to appeal more to American audiences at the time. To be honest I've never seen Miami Vice but some of the interior and exterior shots did feel (to me) like they could have been made for television (the stuff inside Felix's house as well as the shots of Miami around the harbour).

    Some of the dialogue and the way it's delivered kind of echo's that too

    "Stick around - might have some more questions for you"

    Its just little things but stuff I've noticed.

    I do like the Latin feel though and the Michael Kamen score reflects that.

    I've never been a big fan of DAF (I actually prefer LTK) and I agree parts of that do look quite cheap too. TWINE also looks very grey other than a few impressive shots.

    I'll agree that GE does look kind of dated aswell but some of it still looks impressive like the early shots of Monte Carlo and the interior of the casino. Also even some of the more "drab" sets have more detail than a lot of the stuff in Kill (Alec's control room).
  • acoppolaacoppola London Ealing not far from where Bob Simmons lived
    edited November 2012 Posts: 1,243
    BAIN123 wrote:
    In contrast LTK - despite its good qualities - feels somewhat dated and cheap.

    That's how I feel towards GE. It's all looks so grey and bland and that CGI shot of the Earth looks dated even by 1995 standards. TND which is only 2 years it's junior, has aged much better.

    Yeah GE has dated more than TND. In fact TND looks the best out o
    BAIN123 wrote:
    Personally I think the "TV movie" feel of the film is pretty blatant. Perhaps that was the idea though at the time given how popular Miami Vice was. I remember reading that they deliberately tried to appeal more to American audiences at the time. To be honest I've never seen Miami Vice but some of the interior and exterior shots did feel (to me) like they could have been made for television (the stuff inside Felix's house as well as the shots of Miami around the harbour).

    Some of the dialogue and the way it's delivered kind of echo's that too

    "Stick around - might have some more questions for you"

    Its just little things but stuff I've noticed.

    I've never been a big fan of DAF and I agree parts of that do look quite cheap too. TWINE also looks very grey other than a few impressive shots.

    I'll agree that GE does look kind of dated aswell but some of it still looks impressive like the early shots of Monte Carlo and the interior of the casino. Also even some of the more "drab" sets have more detail than a lot of the stuff in Kill (Alec's control room).

    You haven't seen Miami Vice yet say it looks like Miami Vice. I am not blaming you but some journalists wrongly said that and you are repeating what you read. I have read most of the critiques of the film and am a smart ass!:)

    I watched Miami Vice in the 80's avidly and knowing the style of the series, I in no way thought LTK reminded me of it. They did use the costume designer from Miami Vice and Dalton told her where she could stick it. She wanted to dress him like Don Johnson.

    They tried to appeal to American audiences by upping the violence to compete with the more hard hitting style of the time. But the violence was taken from Fleming which when you read the books has sadistic elements.

    The set of Sanchez's layer reminds me of Dr No. Especially how it all explodes.

Sign In or Register to comment.