Last Bond Movie You Watched

1236237239241242331

Comments

  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020

    The Living Daylights
    GoldenEye

    Star Trek The Undiscovered Country
    Star Trek First Contact

    Batman 1989
    Batman Begins

    Six of the best films ever made.

    OH YES! :D
  • edited June 2017 Posts: 12,284
    Those are all very good films; 3 of them are in my Top 100.
  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,854
    All six of them are in my top 10.
  • I watched Goldeneye a month or two ago and I must say it managed to shot up my rankings to #3. Superb film.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    edited June 2017 Posts: 9,020
    The long fight between Brosnan and Alec on/in the satellite dish is epic!

    And brutal! It's unrivalled to this day. Nothing as good has come along since.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited June 2017 Posts: 23,883
    SF

    I had a great time with it, as usual. Never gets old, this one. It's certainly a visual feast at least. The part that's grown on me the most with multiple viewings is the Home Alone/MacGuyver/A-Team finale, which I wasn't too keen on in the theatre. It's beautifully shot, reasonably tense, and very well scored. Moreover, the explosion of the ranch after the helicopter goes into it is spectacular. I much prefer it to the middle section in London, although the killer moment at the Hearing with Bond shooting the fire extinguishers and walking out into the centre of the room with the PPK cocked like a boss is always enjoyable. Craig's in fine form in this film. Very little to fault in his performance, and in those of anyone else either. Bardem's a hoot, and I wish there was more of him here. He's a pleasure to watch whenever he's around. Harris is definitely a weak link, but I prefer her work here to in SP due to the quality of the writing. I still find her exchanges with Craig a bit forced though. This is definitely still a top 10 film for me.
  • Posts: 6,857
    The long fight between Brosnan and Alec on/in the satellite dish is epic!

    And brutal! It's unrivalled to this day. Nothing as good has come along since.

    I would put the stairwell fighf from CR and the train scrap from SP way ahead of it in terms of excitement and brutality! Even the brief hotel room fight from QOS is better!
  • edited June 2017 Posts: 11,189
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    The long fight between Brosnan and Alec on/in the satellite dish is epic!

    And brutal! It's unrivalled to this day. Nothing as good has come along since.

    I would put the stairwell fighf from CR and the train scrap from SP way ahead of it in terms of excitement and brutality! Even the brief hotel room fight from QOS is better!

    You know what? I think I actually agree with you. I love the Bond/Alec fight but all three of those Craig fights you mention have surpassed it in terms of brutality.

    Still, I think the antenna fight was the best scrap Bond had got into for a good while at that point...and was easily the best fight Brosnan had in his films.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,597
    agreed @Mathis1 , no matter how good the choreography in the GE fight, I just never bought that Brosnan could hurt anyone. The way he punches alone is terrible, just terrible. On top of that, he looked like he weighed about a hundred lbs in GE, so using grappling moves wouldn't much help him either...
  • Posts: 6,857
    Think you're biased Birdleson since you hate SP so much. The SP fight is still a bruising encounter and well directed and harkens back to the Bob Simmons style and effective use of props and sound effects The GE fight is rather ordinary compared to it, and the fact its staged in a dark environment doesn't help. No, the SP one is way better.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 3,985
    The SP fight is the best thing in the film. It's brutal, tense and superbly choreographed and edited. Sorry but it dumps on any Brosnan fight from a great height.
  • jake24jake24 Sitting at your desk, kissing your lover, eating supper with your familyModerator
    Posts: 10,588
    The SP fight is slightly better than GE, but both are excellent. The former has some magnificent sound design as well.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited June 2017 Posts: 23,883
    Arguably the train fight is the best sequence in the entire film (at least imho). It had better be, given Craig incurred his injury (which likely negatively impacted so much of how the film turned out) on account of it. I like the visceral nature of the fight and how Newman scores it (basically by not incorporating a score until the critical moment when Bond is on the ropes as it were, which increases the tension). Having said that, it is the 4th major fight sequence in the Bond series on a train (and the other 3 are quite iconic in their own right, with 2 involving the assailant being thrown out of the train as well), and I would have preferred if it had occurred elsewhere.

    I prefer the GE fight personally for the originality of the location where it occurs, although it's true that Brosnan appears a bit frail and can't throw a punch to save his life. The fight is also choreographed in a way that seems a bit structured and telegraphed (throw punch, duck, receive hit etc. etc.). One can almost sense the actors trying to remember their 'moves' as they go through the motions. Nevertheless, it's a highlight of the film, and the personal animosity between Trevalyn and Bond helps to elevate the encounter for me. The film builds to this moment nicely.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    edited June 2017 Posts: 17,694
    I personally like the fight between Bond & Stamper at the end of TND. It's a pretty good confrontation in an excellently tense scene IMO. Wai about to drown ups the ante. One thing though- nine what?
    ;)
  • Posts: 462
    I personally love the ending GE fight. I think it's very well done and the idea of them fighting up that far in the air on a small little platform is great. Brosnan doesn't have a fist fight like it in the rest of the tenure and it's punctuated perfectly with Bond's "f*ck you!" to Trevelyan before he drops him.

    SP's train fight is good, a highlight of the film actually. I like the Bond/Slate hotel fight, too. Craig just moves more believeable in them but GE proves Brosnan could've been just as good with a better quality director. Brosnan's fight usually suffer from bad staging, direction, editing or overscoring.
  • Major_BoothroydMajor_Boothroyd Republic of Isthmus
    Posts: 2,721
    Watched Tomorrow Never Dies last night (as part of the anniversary theme - watching Bond films from 1967, 77, 87 and 97 (plus CR '67!) I've watched The Spy Who Loved Me already so I dived into Brosnan's second film last night. It certainly doesn't get boring. The pace rips along even if it feels like set pieces welded together. This has become an issue for me on repeat viewings of Bond films. The idea of 'suspense across the narrative' - something that my favourite Bond films do very well. TND doesn't have much interest in it.

    But there were some good reassessments for me - the chief one being that Brosnan is actually one of the real strengths of the film. He has a couple of Bondian cool moments - and if you avert your eyes (and ears) from his interactions with Teri Hatcher - then no real embarrassing moments. I liked him in the climax particularly. The scene with the remote control car is enjoyable fun and well constructed. Props to the director for this - mainly because I found some of the other scenes quite wanting in the careful construction department. Stampa isn't as anonymous as I initially thought. He's a relatively credible threat for Brosnan. And the Kaufman moment is an inspired scene.

    Sure there are plenty of things I dislike about the film - but I'm trying to be positive here so I'll just say that the Carver couple are a big issue throughout the film for me. But as far a repeat viewing film goes - I'd actually be more tempted to put this on again rather than TWINE - which I prefer for it's ambitions more than TND.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,694
    Watched Tomorrow Never Dies last night (as part of the anniversary theme - watching Bond films from 1967, 77, 87 and 97 (plus CR '67!) I've watched The Spy Who Loved Me already so I dived into Brosnan's second film last night. It certainly doesn't get boring. The pace rips along even if it feels like set pieces welded together. This has become an issue for me on repeat viewings of Bond films. The idea of 'suspense across the narrative' - something that my favourite Bond films do very well. TND doesn't have much interest in it.

    But there were some good reassessments for me - the chief one being that Brosnan is actually one of the real strengths of the film. He has a couple of Bondian cool moments - and if you avert your eyes (and ears) from his interactions with Teri Hatcher - then no real embarrassing moments. I liked him in the climax particularly. The scene with the remote control car is enjoyable fun and well constructed. Props to the director for this - mainly because I found some of the other scenes quite wanting in the careful construction department. Stampa isn't as anonymous as I initially thought. He's a relatively credible threat for Brosnan. And the Kaufman moment is an inspired scene.

    Sure there are plenty of things I dislike about the film - but I'm trying to be positive here so I'll just say that the Carver couple are a big issue throughout the film for me. But as far a repeat viewing film goes - I'd actually be more tempted to put this on again rather than TWINE - which I prefer for it's ambitions more than TND.

    This is an entirely fair and thoughtful review of what essentially is my third favourite Bond movie. Though TWINE may be moving up a bit... in a bit.
  • Posts: 11,189
    I don't consider SP one of my favourite films but the train fight is great stuff. I still remember the audience applauded after the sequence on the first viewing in the cinema.
  • Posts: 6,857
    Birdleson wrote: »
    Don't try to get in my head @Mathis1 , I call then as I see them. Just speak for yourself.

    Wouldn't dream of it! Doesn't sound like a nice place!
  • edited July 2017 Posts: 1,817
    Dr. No
    In the first 007 entry, Bond is armed not with a contrived and superfluous gadget or the proverbial Aston Martin, but instead with his Walther. Indeed, watching DN recalls the viewer to a time when the world of Bond was simpler and more grounded. Its low-budget no-nonsense attitude is in fact its greatest strength, as there are no frills, no excess and no elongated action scenes; only a cold, hard, espionage thriller.

    Central to this film is Sean Connery's charismatic portrayal of Bond. Charming on the surface, he is cunning and ruthless when he needs to be; an embodiment of the alluring world of guns, danger, exotic locales and beautiful women. For me, Connery would ease into the role and better himself as the era went on (he speaks a bit too aggressively at times), but his performance here kicks it off in style.

    In acknowledgement of its low budget, the film hooks the viewer with suspense as opposed to action; we are eagerly anticipating the moment when Bond and Dr. No will meet face-to-face. That said, its feeble attempts at action do highlight an evident shortcoming - they are not only dated by today's standards, but would pale to the electrifying action sequences of its two subsequent successors.

    Indeed, DN is not perfect, particularly on the technical front. The 60s were a different time; cross-fades are used excessively, jump-cuts can take you out of the picture and the car chase is now infamous for its back projection. Monty Norman's score may also be the weakest in the Bond pantheon (see Bond's killing of the spider to the sound of Looney Tunes).

    These faults are not serious, however. Indeed, there is only one truly debilitating fault with DN - its climax is quite underwhelming. This is unfortunate, as the doctor is built up to be a significant threat, only to fall so easily. Bond clumsily running around searching for Honey and haphazardly demanding the doctor's lackeys to know where Honey is as the base is about to explode looks silly and unfocused as an ending to an otherwise well-constructed picture.

    Still, there is no doubt that DN is remembered today for its seminal moments, most notably the famed introduction to the character of 007. There is a reason Bond has lasted more than 50 years - because it has a good foundation to work on.

    7/10
  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing Long Neck Ice Cold Beer Never Broke My Heart
    Posts: 4,428
    I need to get back on the wagon soon. Havent watched a Bond film in awhile..
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,528
    @Birdleson, you know me too well. I was actually going to suggest Facebook chat or something a bit faster for watching them live. Could be easier/quicker than texting.

    It's definitely a blast, enjoyed it that night as much as I always do. Perhaps even more so, given it had been months since I watched one (sans TMWTGG when Moore passed away).
  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing Long Neck Ice Cold Beer Never Broke My Heart
    Posts: 4,428
    YOLT.

    Passed out before Bond even received his briefing from M.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,153
    Dr. No
    In the first 007 entry, Bond is armed not with a contrived and superfluous gadget or the proverbial Aston Martin, but instead with his Walther. Indeed, watching DN recalls the viewer to a time when the world of Bond was simpler and more grounded. Its low-budget no-nonsense attitude is in fact its greatest strength, as there are no frills, no excess and no elongated action scenes; only a cold, hard, espionage thriller.

    Central to this film is Sean Connery's charismatic portrayal of Bond. Charming on the surface, he is cunning and ruthless when he needs to be; an embodiment of the alluring world of guns, danger, exotic locales and beautiful women. For me, Connery would ease into the role and better himself as the era went on (he speaks a bit too aggressively at times), but his performance here kicks it off in style.

    In acknowledgement of its low budget, the film hooks the viewer with suspense as opposed to action; we are eagerly anticipating the moment when Bond and Dr. No will meet face-to-face. That said, its feeble attempts at action do highlight an evident shortcoming - they are not only dated by today's standards, but would pale to the electrifying action sequences of its two subsequent successors.

    Indeed, DN is not perfect, particularly on the technical front. The 60s were a different time; cross-fades are used excessively, jump-cuts can take you out of the picture and the car chase is now infamous for its back projection. Monty Norman's score may also be the weakest in the Bond pantheon (see Bond's killing of the spider to the sound of Looney Tunes).

    These faults are not serious, however. Indeed, there is only one truly debilitating fault with DN - its climax is quite underwhelming. This is unfortunate, as the doctor is built up to be a significant threat, only to fall so easily. Bond clumsily running around searching for Honey and haphazardly demanding the doctor's lackeys to know where Honey is as the base is about to explode looks silly and unfocused as an ending to an otherwise well-constructed picture.

    Still, there is no doubt that DN is remembered today for its seminal moments, most notably the famed introduction to the character of 007. There is a reason Bond has lasted more than 50 years - because it has a good foundation to work on.

    7/10

    Fantastic post. I must say, the ending never disappoints me, and I think it's more a problem with a modern audience looking back. We've been trained to think that the finale does start until the action kicks off, whereas back then it was different. The climax of the film, IMO, overs the entire last half an hour, starting from when Bond and Honey gets captured. This is because, starting then we start getting answers to the questions that have been posed throughout the first hour or so. Dr No's aura begins to diminish the moment the dragon is proven (as Bond suspects) to be vehicular. Then again once Bond meets the man himself, and undermines him over dinner. Then again once Bond break from his cell, and assumes the identity of the worker, fooling Dr No in the process. When you look at it in that context, Bond actually preventing Dr No's Plan from going ahead, and defeating him, was only really the final straw.
  • Dr. No
    In the first 007 entry, Bond is armed not with a contrived and superfluous gadget or the proverbial Aston Martin, but instead with his Walther. Indeed, watching DN recalls the viewer to a time when the world of Bond was simpler and more grounded. Its low-budget no-nonsense attitude is in fact its greatest strength, as there are no frills, no excess and no elongated action scenes; only a cold, hard, espionage thriller.

    Central to this film is Sean Connery's charismatic portrayal of Bond. Charming on the surface, he is cunning and ruthless when he needs to be; an embodiment of the alluring world of guns, danger, exotic locales and beautiful women. For me, Connery would ease into the role and better himself as the era went on (he speaks a bit too aggressively at times), but his performance here kicks it off in style.

    In acknowledgement of its low budget, the film hooks the viewer with suspense as opposed to action; we are eagerly anticipating the moment when Bond and Dr. No will meet face-to-face. That said, its feeble attempts at action do highlight an evident shortcoming - they are not only dated by today's standards, but would pale to the electrifying action sequences of its two subsequent successors.

    Indeed, DN is not perfect, particularly on the technical front. The 60s were a different time; cross-fades are used excessively, jump-cuts can take you out of the picture and the car chase is now infamous for its back projection. Monty Norman's score may also be the weakest in the Bond pantheon (see Bond's killing of the spider to the sound of Looney Tunes).

    These faults are not serious, however. Indeed, there is only one truly debilitating fault with DN - its climax is quite underwhelming. This is unfortunate, as the doctor is built up to be a significant threat, only to fall so easily. Bond clumsily running around searching for Honey and haphazardly demanding the doctor's lackeys to know where Honey is as the base is about to explode looks silly and unfocused as an ending to an otherwise well-constructed picture.

    Still, there is no doubt that DN is remembered today for its seminal moments, most notably the famed introduction to the character of 007. There is a reason Bond has lasted more than 50 years - because it has a good foundation to work on.

    7/10

    Fantastic post. I must say, the ending never disappoints me, and I think it's more a problem with a modern audience looking back. We've been trained to think that the finale does start until the action kicks off, whereas back then it was different. The climax of the film, IMO, overs the entire last half an hour, starting from when Bond and Honey gets captured. This is because, starting then we start getting answers to the questions that have been posed throughout the first hour or so. Dr No's aura begins to diminish the moment the dragon is proven (as Bond suspects) to be vehicular. Then again once Bond meets the man himself, and undermines him over dinner. Then again once Bond break from his cell, and assumes the identity of the worker, fooling Dr No in the process. When you look at it in that context, Bond actually preventing Dr No's Plan from going ahead, and defeating him, was only really the final straw.

    I definitely agree that the film can be felt moving towards its climax as soon as they are captured, and the scenes on the island are classic Connery. I view the fight differently (I still see it as the genuine climax) but the stuff afterwards is just the denouement.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited July 2017 Posts: 23,883
    TSWLM

    Just finished watching this, in honour of its 40th. I last viewed it on the night of Roger’s passing (in fact, it is the last Moore Bond film I watched). Far from being bored by it, I was actually more engrossed tonight. Perhaps the sadness I felt on May 23rd prevented me from completely appreciating it then.

    I continue to be impressed by this film every time I watch it & can’t believe EON were churning out epic quality like this 40 years ago. It remains a magnificent larger than life viewing experience in each instance. I realize that it's essentially a remake of YOLT but it's just done so well. This is Bond by way of Lean. Every shot is beautifully framed, lit and composed. It really is masterclass work by the team behind it. The only other Bond film that gives me this feeling (and it did from the first trailer I saw of it) is SF. Moreover, the locations are just amazing & one can almost smell the atmosphere, particularly in Egypt but also in Italy and during all the 'at sea' scenes. I’ve still got Egypt on my list of spots to visit one day. My dad went when younger and has photos at the pyramids and on a camel and I’ve always wanted to do the same. Perhaps soon.

    I’ve always liked Bach as Anya. Even as a small kid. The character is cool as a cucumber and quite sexy. I particularly am drawn to her serious, all business demeanour. Icy cold, competent and confident but quite forgiving under it all. A real female Bond in personality. I realize she gets blasted as being wooden, and acting is definitely not Bach's forte, but she does have some decent scenes in this film. E.g when Gogol tells her of Barsov’s death, when Bond teases her about Naomi, and of course when she finds out Bond killed Barsov. I also enjoyed her acting throughout the Egypt scenes, including when she got to Bond about Tracy & when she's panicking in the truck as Jaws tears it up.

    Many cite FYEO as Roger's best performance (I personally prefer him in TMWTGG) but I think he is actually much better here than in that film. He’s having more fun, and his trademark original humour is more apparent but doesn’t overwhelm like it does in some later entries (including this film’s immediate successor). He truly was one of a kind, and I really miss him not being around any more.

    Here’s to you Sir Rog, and to the whole team behind this magnificent creation including Cubby, Gilbert, Hamlisch, Wood, Maibum, Adam, Renoir, Glen, Carly Simon, Carole Bayer Sager, Kubrick (uncredited) et al. Thank you for providing us with this classic for posterity.

    Happy 40th birthday TSWLM!.
  • Posts: 12,284
    Birdleson wrote: »
    NEVER SAY NEVER AGAIN (1983)

    As with most viewings, this was fairly enjoyable. Yes, it drags through sections, sadly the final showdown being one of them, and the production values are not up to EON standards (though I admire the cinematography), but there is a sharp wit and sophistication in the dialogue and the performances that had been lacking in the regular franchise for a decade. A fun time. He's not the Connery of old, but he's a joy to watch. The supporting cast is excellent across the board. With the glaring exception of Kin Basinger; she is horrible.

    I agree with a lot of that. Still, unfortunately, I think I still enjoy it less than that. I was never 100% invested, even though it was still fun to see Connery again. I think it had some good moments but I'd still rank it right near the bottom if I included it with the EON films. Definitely wouldn't be any higher than #21 - which is DAF on my list.
  • Major_BoothroydMajor_Boothroyd Republic of Isthmus
    Posts: 2,721
    Birdleson wrote: »
    NEVER SAY NEVER AGAIN (1983)

    As with most viewings, this was fairly enjoyable. Yes, it drags through sections, sadly the final showdown being one of them, and the production values are not up to EON standards (though I admire the cinematography), but there is a sharp wit and sophistication in the dialogue and the performances that had been lacking in the regular franchise for a decade. A fun time. He's not the Connery of old, but he's a joy to watch. The supporting cast is excellent across the board. With the glaring exception of Kin Basinger; she is horrible.

    Yeah - I've got a soft spot for NSNA - it was the only Bond film they'd play repeatedly on TV in my country when I was a kid so in the mid 80s this was the Bond film I saw the most. I prefer the Shrublands sequence in NSNA to TB - particularly that fight. And the straight corruption of Dominique's brother works better than the convoluted plastic surgery of TB. The stealing of the nuclear bombs is quite tense as well. Connery taking the cigarette case back off the terrified guard in the closet is on par with EON Bond. I also think Bernie Casey makes for a good Felix Leiter. Klaus Maria Brandeur is brilliant as Largo and Barbara Carrera fun as Fatima.

    But the film is pretty woeful in the third act. Once Fatima explodes off the screen most of the good stuff goes with her.
  • Birdleson wrote: »
    NEVER SAY NEVER AGAIN (1983)

    As with most viewings, this was fairly enjoyable. Yes, it drags through sections, sadly the final showdown being one of them, and the production values are not up to EON standards (though I admire the cinematography), but there is a sharp wit and sophistication in the dialogue and the performances that had been lacking in the regular franchise for a decade. A fun time. He's not the Connery of old, but he's a joy to watch. The supporting cast is excellent across the board. With the glaring exception of Kin Basinger; she is horrible.

    Yeah - I've got a soft spot for NSNA - it was the only Bond film they'd play repeatedly on TV in my country when I was a kid so in the mid 80s this was the Bond film I saw the most. I prefer the Shrublands sequence in NSNA to TB - particularly that fight. And the straight corruption of Dominique's brother works better than the convoluted plastic surgery of TB. The stealing of the nuclear bombs is quite tense as well. Connery taking the cigarette case back off the terrified guard in the closet is on par with EON Bond. I also think Bernie Casey makes for a good Felix Leiter. Klaus Maria Brandeur is brilliant as Largo and Barbara Carrera fun as Fatima.

    But the film is pretty woeful in the third act. Once Fatima explodes off the screen most of the good stuff goes with her.

    I agree with just about all of this and will only add that that stunning motorcycle chase is up there with the best of EON's action sequences from that decade. There's a lot of class and wit in the film. And a lot of 80s, too. It's like a bonus 80s Bond film. The performances are great for the most part with Brandauer and Carrera shining. Even though they don't do much, it's also nice just to see Max von Sydow and Rowan Atkinson in there briefly. And what Basinger lacks in the acting department, she makes up for in leotard-wearing.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited July 2017 Posts: 23,883
    I don't mind NSNA and agree that the dialogue is quite sharp and witty. Having said that, I didn't mind any of the dialogue in the 70's and early 80's EON efforts either.

    What's fundamentally missing in NSNA is that whimsy and otherworldly larger than life quality which the EON series had up to that point (yes, I think it still had it in 1983 after Adam left, but it disappeared in LTK which went all gritty and down to earth).

    I find NSNA increasingly enjoyable these days because it more fits into the way EON makes the films now, which is more gritty and real.
Sign In or Register to comment.