Last Bond Movie You Watched

1238239241243244331

Comments

  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    bondjames wrote: »
    Thanks for letting me know about the documentary @Crazysoul95. That's an excellent sequence no doubt, and I'm curious to see how they did it.
    ---

    TLD

    After my continued positive experience with LTK, I thought I'd try Dalton's debut film tonight. I've had a mixed impression of this film over the years. When I first saw it I much preferred it to his later effort (which I actually disliked immensely at first). As time has progressed, their positions have reversed and TLD is the one I'm not all that keen on these days. Sadly, tonight's viewing only served to reaffirm that negative opinion.

    Dalton is excellent in this film as well, and his performance as Bond has actually grown on me over the past few nights. I think he does the intense, moody Bond far better than Daniel Craig. He's more accessible too and less robotic. More human. He certainly doesn't do 'cool' as well, but there is a certain authenticity to Dalton as Bond which is appealing. He looks good too. Lean, fit and tall as Bond should be.

    So what's the problem? Well, it all comes down to the usual suspects: 1) whiny Kara, 2) weak villains and 3) Afghanistan. D'Abo is quite attractive (if a little undernourished), but I find her terribly annoying. While I tried to enjoy the Afghanistan sequences today, it didn't work out and I found myself tuning out as usual, only to become re-engaged during the plane fight. Then the awful epilogue at Whitaker's spoiled things again, and as usual it was further compounded by the naff concert replete with Kamran's men barging in like a bunch of goons (I can't imagine how this was considered amusing even in 1987).

    So sadly I must disagree with the majority of forum members (who rate this film highly) on this one. It remains distinctly lower middle of the pack for me, but Dalton is excellent.

    @bondjames, I'm in the LTK camp too. It's just a more interesting experience for me, and Dalton is more raw and compelling to watch, something I've been criticized for saying in the past, for whatever reason. The touches of Live & Let Die in the story don't hurt either. I can also enjoy TLD immensely, for its great start and how it character builds Dalton's Bond, as well as Pushkin (one of my all time favorite Bond characters) and I'm even pro-Kara. But those elements don't make a superior film in comparison to Dalton's second for me.

    Despite some tonal inconsistencies (and a bad ending with the worst tonal change of all), LTK is more of a ride for me and the addition of a very strong Sanchez, great location work and set design, and a plot that shows Bond holding nothing back (and being cruel in many moments) really shines. Bond goes through hell and we watch him getting destroyed, really driving home the humanity and vulnerability of him. The plot has a Fleming inspiration and all the original content, of Bond picking apart Sanchez's group from the inside with subterfuge, is definitely something I could see him writing. The film also ends with Bond experiencing a great failure that leaves him exposed, leading him into a final bloody face-off with the villain that leaves him tattered and near death, a very Fleming-esque climax.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited July 2017 Posts: 23,883
    @0BradyM0Bondfanatic7, I agree with your comments. Most importantly for me, LTK as a film just suits Dalton better. It's more in sync with his portrayal of the character. It's 'Dalton unleashed', and that's what makes it a film that stays with me. I also find it to be a more cohesive viewing experience & tonally consistent for the most part, except for the few hat-tips to 80's cheese.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    bondjames wrote: »
    @0BradyM0Bondfanatic7, I agree with your comments. Most importantly for me, LTK as a film just suits Dalton better. It's more in sync with his portrayal of the character. It's 'Dalton unleashed', and that's what makes it a film that stays with me. I also find it to be a more cohesive viewing experience & tonally consistent for the most part, except for the few hat-tips to 80's cheese.

    @bondjames, agreed on Dalton. He gets dragged in the dirt by some for overacting, but I am unapologetic in my enjoyment of watching him go nuts in the search of Felix and Della's abusers. Scenes like him interrogating Lupe with a knife are all I want and need, and I agree that they suit Dalton more. He's able to be most in tune with how Bond should be when he's given raw moments to play, and it's there that his humanity and cruelty is balanced. A man doing bad things with good intent.

    I wish the 80s hangups weren't there, the biggest issue I have with the two films, but there's enough there to enjoy that they don't ruin it. I do get annoyed every time I watch them though for the inclusions on Glen's side of some of the loony things we saw in the Moore era, and it hampers the experience a bit. Those kinds of flourishes, especially the forced comedy, don't suit those movies, especially LTK that is far more earnest in premise and shouldn't be so off balanced. I cringe every time Bond races out of Sanchez's factory at the end and, after seeing one of the agents impaled on a forklift, makes a joke about it. It not only feels in poor taste, but it also isn't something I feel his Bond would do and it offsets the tension of the moment and the tone horribly.

    The comedy should've been super dry as in the books, where Bond can be funny but almost on accident or in spite of himself. As Dalton was trying to bring out the literary angle, the very unfitting "wit" doesn't help him fall more in line with Fleming's original, whereas minor moments of dry wit would've suited him better. It's something Dan has since really monopolized on, bringing out the dryness of the original character in more organic and natural moments of frivolity in his films, with his own bend on the humanity and cruelty of the man. I'd also count QoS as superior to LTK when it comes to a "serious" Bond film done right, even only for how the former is able to keep a consistency the latter can't.

    But LTK was a great starting point, a great risk for the time, and I don't think we'd see some of the more earnest stories we have now without EON proving that Bond could go there and not break the bank over the attempt in 89.
  • Posts: 6,857
    In defence of TLD, indeed the Afghanistan scenes slow it down, but as I've said before, every Bond movie has a slow section. Regarding Kara, she maybe annoying to some (Hello barry007!!), but it was the genuine chemistry between her and Bond that was so appealing, he was very protective of her and she and Dalton are great together. It was the most affecting relationship since Bond and Tracy! The villains? Well i liked Jeroen Krabbe, he wasn't a physically imposing bad guy like Sanchez, but he was a great sneaky 'do anything to save his own skin' type. Necros was a very imposing henchman and his final fight on the cargo net with 007 was a series highlight. I also defend Whitaker, he was a larger than life villain, his first encounter with Pushkin was well written and i think his final shootout in his war room with Bond was well staged. TLD is one of the best films. Dalton was utterlly compelling. For me, when i read one of Flemings novels i see Dalton! The story was intriguing with excellent action sequences, great score from John Barry and it never fails to entertain me when i want a proper Bond fix!
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited July 2017 Posts: 23,883
    @Mathis, that is a stirring defense of TLD. I agree that Dalton and D'Abo work well off one another. His 'human' Bond probably could only work best with someone like Kara. It's just that she's not my type of character, that's all. I prefer a little less needy, less emotional and more strong independent types in reality, and that impacts my perceptions of the film because she's in it a lot. I get your point about Koskov being a devious cowardly type, and Krabbe certainly plays him well. It's just that neither he nor Whitaker seem even remotely threatening to Bond (despite the latter's plethora of military equipment). Speaking of which, I wondered yesterday why we didn't see more of those state of the art weapons in the film? I'm afraid I don't see Whitaker as 'larger than life' though, except perhaps in his own mind! Quite forgettable!

    PS: One more thing which annoyed me yesterday was John Glen's 'myopic' inability to 'set the scene' contextually when filming on location. If one watches the Tangiers rooftop sequence, he only has one 'wide angle' long distance shot showing Bond running on the rooftops of the buildings. One! Even though the entire team was on location in a beautiful spot. What a waste! I've noticed he does that a lot, and it's a pity. So keen on focusing on the nitty gritty of the action (which he does so well) that he misses the beauty of the location. He's the opposite of Gilbert in this respect.
  • BondAficionadoBondAficionado Former IMDBer
    edited July 2017 Posts: 1,884
    Live and Let Die

    This film is a great start. I'm doing a "7 films for 7 days" tribute to Sir Roger.

    LALD certainly has Moore's trademarked campy moments laced throughout, but the general tone is refreshingly bizarre and sinister. That's what I like most about it; the weird rituals, the voodoo and Mr. Big's character. He's always looming in the shadows, one step away from killing Bond. When he eventually meets him, he's got a no-nonsense way of talking with him. Kotto really became the part.

    Locations are stunning, but not as much as Solitaire is. Like I've previously said; the best Bond girl of the seventies hands down. Rosie isn't so bad either. She gets a lot of flak on these boards for some reason, but I think Hendry's performance is top class for her character. Really sells it.

    TMWTGG later today.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    I love LALD too, and you're right that there's an ominous presence permeating the proceedings which is cool, whether it be Big or Samedi. Not too keen on Rosie though, I'm afraid.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    OP on ITV Sunday...... loved it.
  • BondAficionadoBondAficionado Former IMDBer
    Posts: 1,884
    The Man With The Golden Gun

    Following the tradition of the "worse/better/worse..." pattern, this movie lacks the energy and excitement of its predecessor. Which makes it a more grounded (though not realistic) film. To add to the effect, the shots are long and often wide too. This slows down the pace considerably. It's not a particularly bad creative decision, but those 2h feel like 2h.

    But enough about that. The best part of this film is Sir Roger himself. I've said it before and I'll say it again: this is his best Bond performance. Exhibit A: Bond meeting Miss Anders in her hotel room. This is the only instance where Moore actually came across as a realistic/dangerous person. Say all you want about his "gritty" take in FYEO, but it will never outshine the moment he's twisting her arm and getting her to talk. You might think this is Moore imitating Connery... but you're wrong. "I don't want to either," he quips after she asks him not to do it again. Moore is still himself. Sure, it's his profession, yet under his armor there is a heart and he doesn't enjoy hurting her. This is something Connery's subtly sadistic portrayal would never admit and it only shows how different Moore's Bond was.

    Moore commands the room and is always in control. Walking right up to her by the shower, sitting down/ ignoring her and showing no signs of fear. Even when she's pointing a gun at him he'll find a way to ease the tension with a witticism. "A water pistol?" "I see why these packets carry a government warning." After getting what he wants, Bond opens a champagne and starts giving orders as if it's just another Thursday. A perfect scene if I may say so.

    Scaramanga has always been a mediocre villain, personally. Lee does a fine job, but he's too cold and distant. Like when he's creepily touching Miss Anders with his pistol (ahem) and is completely silent. He also lives a (relatively) secluded life at his place, with only a mistress, a butler and a maintenance man to talk to. He's not incredibly intelligent as well. He admits that fact himself and Bond even lectures him. Making Scaramanga seem inferior from the start of their encounter. Bond later mocks his character by calling him a sh*t, but he doesn't come back with anything.

    The action. Solid for a film set in 1974; the barrel role being the pièce de résistance. Even the brief, albeit hilarious, karate school fight and the ensuing water chase are great to watch. Adding JW Pepper is a welcome sight. Though, just like the film, he's not as good as LALD, although he has his moments. He works brilliantly off of Moore and this is the only time that we see them have a conversation together. Also, the scene before the car chase is nice to watch; "Oh, I've got the keys and I've got the solex too!" Great stuff.

    Finally the score. Barry's worst attempt, but it works inside the universe of the film. Listening to this soundtrack isolated wouldn't be smart. The beginning is too eerie for my taste. For example; the remixed title song played in the fun house. It just doesn't fit into the scene at all, due to the lighthearted nature of it, pitted against the reality of Rodney's state. The score is also fairly repetitive and half way through everyone's heard too many "DAH DAHs" for life. It's a shame that Barry's 70s work was outdone by all the other composers. Martin and Hamlisch did a finer job, which brings me to the next film:

    The Spy Who Loved Me - later today.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    The Man With The Golden Gun

    Following the tradition of the "worse/better/worse..." pattern, this movie lacks the energy and excitement of its predecessor. Which makes it a more grounded (though not realistic) film. To add to the effect, the shots are long and often wide too. This slows down the pace considerably. It's not a particularly bad creative decision, but those 2h feel like 2h.

    But enough about that. The best part of this film is Sir Roger himself. I've said it before and I'll say it again: this is his best Bond performance. Exhibit A: Bond meeting Miss Anders in her hotel room. This is the only instance where Moore actually came across as a realistic/dangerous person. Say all you want about his "gritty" take in FYEO, but it will never outshine the moment he's twisting her arm and getting her to talk. You might think this is Moore imitating Connery... but you're wrong. "I don't want to either," he quips after she asks him not to do it again. Moore is still himself. Sure, it's his profession, yet under his armor there is a heart and he doesn't enjoy hurting her. This is something Connery's subtly sadistic portrayal would never admit and it only shows how different Moore's Bond was.

    Moore commands the room and is always in control. Walking right up to her by the shower, sitting down/ ignoring her and showing no signs of fear. Even when she's pointing a gun at him he'll find a way to ease the tension with a witticism. "A water pistol?" "I see why these packets carry a government warning." After getting what he wants, Bond opens a champagne and starts giving orders as if it's just another Thursday. A perfect scene if I may say so.
    Nicely said, and I agree. Moore is superb in TMWTGG. Raw hard edged coolness personified. I so wish he played Bond more like this during his tenure. I think his essential screen 'niceness' allowed him to go there without it appearing too gruff or indecent. A perfect mixture of charm and ruthlessness.

    PS: I love the long/wide filming style. It gives the locations context. This is the opposite of the John Glen quick cut (a precursor to Bourne) style. I agree that the film is much slower paced, but that again is something I like about it. To me, the atmosphere drips off it.
  • BondAficionadoBondAficionado Former IMDBer
    Posts: 1,884
    bondjames wrote: »
    The Man With The Golden Gun

    Following the tradition of the "worse/better/worse..." pattern, this movie lacks the energy and excitement of its predecessor. Which makes it a more grounded (though not realistic) film. To add to the effect, the shots are long and often wide too. This slows down the pace considerably. It's not a particularly bad creative decision, but those 2h feel like 2h.

    But enough about that. The best part of this film is Sir Roger himself. I've said it before and I'll say it again: this is his best Bond performance. Exhibit A: Bond meeting Miss Anders in her hotel room. This is the only instance where Moore actually came across as a realistic/dangerous person. Say all you want about his "gritty" take in FYEO, but it will never outshine the moment he's twisting her arm and getting her to talk. You might think this is Moore imitating Connery... but you're wrong. "I don't want to either," he quips after she asks him not to do it again. Moore is still himself. Sure, it's his profession, yet under his armor there is a heart and he doesn't enjoy hurting her. This is something Connery's subtly sadistic portrayal would never admit and it only shows how different Moore's Bond was.

    Moore commands the room and is always in control. Walking right up to her by the shower, sitting down/ ignoring her and showing no signs of fear. Even when she's pointing a gun at him he'll find a way to ease the tension with a witticism. "A water pistol?" "I see why these packets carry a government warning." After getting what he wants, Bond opens a champagne and starts giving orders as if it's just another Thursday. A perfect scene if I may say so.
    Nicely said, and I agree. Moore is superb in TMWTGG. Raw hard edged coolness personified. I so wish he played Bond more like this during his tenure. I think his essential screen 'niceness' allowed him to go there without it appearing too gruff or indecent. A perfect mixture of charm and ruthlessness.

    PS: I love the long/wide filming style. It gives the locations context. This is the opposite of the John Glen quick cut (a precursor to Bourne) style. I agree that the film is much slower paced, but that again is something I like about it. To me, the atmosphere drips off it.

    I also wish that was the case, but alas, Moore preferred to play it more lightheartedly to distance himself from Connery's and Lazenby's attempts. Still love Moore's Bond though.
  • BondAficionadoBondAficionado Former IMDBer
    Posts: 1,884
    The Spy Who Loved Me

    The PTS is excellent. The shot of Bond skiing off the cliff deserves to be framed in a museum, right next to Kubrick's bone/ship match-cut. What makes this film part of the very best Bond films is the sheer magnitude of the production. From the snow-covered cliffs of 'Austria', to the scorching desert in 'Egypt', this film has it all. There's even a real submarine just casually following Bond in the background when he's at the naval base being briefed. It really makes this film feel real and immersive. Credit goes out to the DoP naturally.

    Moving on, Sir Roger gives his next best performance in this film (tied with LALD). This is him doing what he loved doing best. The scene at Kalba's nightclub is a favourite of mine. "Alright, you've made your point. [..] About certain things, yes." Any mention of Tracy is welcomed, but he gives such a nuanced delivery and it makes it that much more bittersweet. Moore is definitely confident in the role at this point and his Bond is effortlessly suave: the way he preps the champagne thinking Anya (they work brilliantly together) will give in, or when he teases her by giving more attention to Naomie on the boat. But this Bond is also smart and alert at all times. For example, when Anya tries to pick up the microfilm we see Bond carefully inspect the building site and he notices the instability of the wood next to him. Very smart.

    Anya gives an amazingly subtle performance imho. She does appear to be "zoned out" most of the time, but that's because Anya is trying to act professional next to Bond. After all, she wants to make her country proud. Gradually she eases her efforts to resist him after Bond saves her, but she still has a guard up. Bach's acting is great during the Naomie scenes where it's beyond obvious that she's getting jealous/protective of Bond and yet keeps on her facade because she can't let Bond know her feelings towards him.

    For what it's worth, Desmond gives one of his best performances in this movie. He doesn't look like he's forgetting lines or becoming flustered. The shots are quite long too. Usually we hear Q speak, but don't really see his face on camera. This isn't the case here, thankfully. The introduction of the Lotus with Q is one of the greatest scenes in the film. A beautiful panning shot of the sea and them arriving by carriage next to the car. We're watching the briefing happen from Anya's POV and so we don't really hear what's being said. Yet we know exactly what's happening. Then we get the classic "Have I ever let you down Q?" "Frequently." Q's face says everything in that moment.

    This film has one of the best ensembles. Naomie is everything she needs to be, Jaws is the best henchman (at least in TSWLM), Stromberg is a charismatic villain who is quite imposing and commander Carter is just fantastic. Shane Rimmer is one of the best allies, but is always overlooked. He helps Bond out on numerous occasions and even delays the torpedo launch to help his pal save a Soviet! Detente indeed. His line delivery is what makes him stand out; "All the same, I think it'd be best if I did.", "Hey wait!" or "You gotta date?" The missile scene where he says that is so tense too.

    Conclusion: This film really has everything a Bond film needs and features one classic scene after another, which automatically puts it firmly in the top 5.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited July 2017 Posts: 23,883
    @BondAficonado, great review and once again I'm in complete agreement with you on Moore's performance in TSWLM. Like you, I rank his work here just below TMWTGG, and on par with LALD (subtle differences in both films).
    The scene at Kalba's nightclub is a favourite of mine. "Alright, you've made your point. [..] About certain things, yes." Any mention of Tracy is welcomed, but he gives such a nuanced delivery and it makes it that much more bittersweet. Moore is definitely confident in the role at this point and his Bond is effortlessly suave: the way he preps the champagne thinking Anya (they work brilliantly together) will give in, or when he teases her by giving more attention to Naomie on the boat. But this Bond is also smart and alert at all times. For example, when Anya tries to pick up the microfilm we see Bond carefully inspect the building site and he notices the instability of the wood next to him. Very smart.
    All fantastic nuanced scenes which I always love to revisit. The champagne contemplation bit is a nice touch, on both sides of the door.
    Anya gives an amazingly subtle performance imho. She does appear to be "zoned out" most of the time, but that's because Anya is trying to act professional next to Bond. After all, she wants to make her country proud. Gradually she eases her efforts to resist him after Bond saves her, but she still has a guard up. Bach's acting is great during the Naomie scenes where it's beyond obvious that she's getting jealous/protective of Bond and yet keeps on her facade because she can't let Bond know her feelings towards him.
    You and I are perhaps in a minority on this one, but I feel entirely the same. Bach isn't the best actress, but she is quite convincing as a cold Russian spy trying to hold her own against this suave Britisher who is quickly making her forget Sergei. Of course she can't show it outright but there are subtle hints that her facade is crumbling, as you note.
    This film has one of the best ensembles. Naomie is everything she needs to be, Jaws is the best henchman (at least in TSWLM), Stromberg is a charismatic villain who is quite imposing and commander Carter is just fantastic. Shane Rimmer is one of the best allies, but is always overlooked. He helps Bond out on numerous occasions and even delays the torpedo launch to help his pal save a Soviet! Detente indeed. His line delivery is what makes him stand out; "All the same, I think it'd be best if I did.", "Hey wait!" or "You gotta date?" The missile scene where he says that is so tense too.
    Love Shane Rimmer and was delighted to see his cameo in Batman Begins (Nolan tribute to Bond, I'm sure).
    Conclusion: This film really has everything a Bond film needs and features one classic scene after another, which automatically puts it firmly in the top 5.
    #3 for me.
  • BondAficionadoBondAficionado Former IMDBer
    Posts: 1,884
    It's no accident that Nolan gave him the part imo. I think Nolan once said that TSWLM was one of the first movies he ever watched and it inspired Batman Begins.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    It's no accident that Nolan gave him the part imo. I think Nolan once said that TSWLM was one of the first movies he ever watched and it inspired Batman Begins.
    I didn't know that. Very interesting. Nolan mentioned during his last interview that SW, Blade Runner and the Bond films of that era were huge influences on him so it makes sense.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    If I ever have to see an actor in a control room, it had better be Shane Rimmer.
  • bondjames wrote: »
    It's no accident that Nolan gave him the part imo. I think Nolan once said that TSWLM was one of the first movies he ever watched and it inspired Batman Begins.
    I didn't know that. Very interesting. Nolan mentioned during his last interview that SW, Blade Runner and the Bond films of that era were huge influences on him so it makes sense.

    Nolan has specifically called out OHMSS as among his favorite films (a Bond fan after my own heart). And he screened Blade Runner for the cast of Batman Begins before starting production and told them, "This is how we're going to make Batman Begins." No coincidence, of course, Rutger Hauer appearing as Mr. Earle.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    bondjames wrote: »
    It's no accident that Nolan gave him the part imo. I think Nolan once said that TSWLM was one of the first movies he ever watched and it inspired Batman Begins.
    I didn't know that. Very interesting. Nolan mentioned during his last interview that SW, Blade Runner and the Bond films of that era were huge influences on him so it makes sense.

    Nolan has specifically called out OHMSS as among his favorite films (a Bond fan after my own heart). And he screened Blade Runner for the cast of Batman Begins before starting production and told them, "This is how we're going to make Batman Begins." No coincidence, of course, Rutger Hauer appearing as Mr. Earle.
    Fascinating to learn this. I hadn't considered the Hauer connection before but now that you mention it, it's obvious. He was excellent in the film too. "Didn't you get the memo".

    Love Batman Begins.
  • bondjames wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    It's no accident that Nolan gave him the part imo. I think Nolan once said that TSWLM was one of the first movies he ever watched and it inspired Batman Begins.
    I didn't know that. Very interesting. Nolan mentioned during his last interview that SW, Blade Runner and the Bond films of that era were huge influences on him so it makes sense.

    Nolan has specifically called out OHMSS as among his favorite films (a Bond fan after my own heart). And he screened Blade Runner for the cast of Batman Begins before starting production and told them, "This is how we're going to make Batman Begins." No coincidence, of course, Rutger Hauer appearing as Mr. Earle.
    Fascinating to learn this. I hadn't considered the Hauer connection before but now that you mention it, it's obvious. He was excellent in the film too. "Didn't you get the memo".

    Love Batman Begins.

    Me too. It is my favorite Nolan film, my favorite Batman film, my favorite superhero film, and in fact one of my favorite films of all time. I just can find no fault with the film.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    bondjames wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    It's no accident that Nolan gave him the part imo. I think Nolan once said that TSWLM was one of the first movies he ever watched and it inspired Batman Begins.
    I didn't know that. Very interesting. Nolan mentioned during his last interview that SW, Blade Runner and the Bond films of that era were huge influences on him so it makes sense.

    Nolan has specifically called out OHMSS as among his favorite films (a Bond fan after my own heart). And he screened Blade Runner for the cast of Batman Begins before starting production and told them, "This is how we're going to make Batman Begins." No coincidence, of course, Rutger Hauer appearing as Mr. Earle.
    Fascinating to learn this. I hadn't considered the Hauer connection before but now that you mention it, it's obvious. He was excellent in the film too. "Didn't you get the memo".

    Love Batman Begins.

    Me too. It is my favorite Nolan film, my favorite Batman film, my favorite superhero film, and in fact one of my favorite films of all time. I just can find no fault with the film.
    Me neither. In fact, this discussion has compelled me to the give the entire trilogy another viewing soon.
  • bondjames wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    It's no accident that Nolan gave him the part imo. I think Nolan once said that TSWLM was one of the first movies he ever watched and it inspired Batman Begins.
    I didn't know that. Very interesting. Nolan mentioned during his last interview that SW, Blade Runner and the Bond films of that era were huge influences on him so it makes sense.

    Nolan has specifically called out OHMSS as among his favorite films (a Bond fan after my own heart). And he screened Blade Runner for the cast of Batman Begins before starting production and told them, "This is how we're going to make Batman Begins." No coincidence, of course, Rutger Hauer appearing as Mr. Earle.
    Fascinating to learn this. I hadn't considered the Hauer connection before but now that you mention it, it's obvious. He was excellent in the film too. "Didn't you get the memo".

    Love Batman Begins.

    Me too. It is my favorite Nolan film, my favorite Batman film, my favorite superhero film, and in fact one of my favorite films of all time. I just can find no fault with the film.
    Me neither. In fact, this discussion has compelled me to the give the entire trilogy another viewing soon.

    I'm actually tempted to myself. I've never cared for TDK as a follow up apart from Ledger's brilliant performance and Ekhart being a great Dent, but TDKR brings things back solidly with a great cast, great fun, and an emotional finish.
  • BondAficionadoBondAficionado Former IMDBer
    Posts: 1,884
    I've managed to salvage the quote I was referencing:

    “The globe trotting elements of “Batman Begins” mostly came from the Bond films. One of the first films I remember seeing was “The Spy Who Loved Me” and at a certain point the Bond films fixed in my head as a great example of scope and scale in large scale images. That idea of getting you to other places, of getting you along for a ride if you can believe in it — in “The Spy Who Loved Me” the Lotus Esprit turns into a submarine and its totally convincing, and it works and you go “Wow that’s incredible.”

    http://www.indiewire.com/2012/11/christopher-nolan-spends-the-knight-at-lincoln-center-5-things-learned-about-batman-and-beyond-42824/

    Presumably all the Bond films inspired Batman Begins in their own small way, but I was still right about the first film part. :b
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited July 2017 Posts: 23,883
    bondjames wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    It's no accident that Nolan gave him the part imo. I think Nolan once said that TSWLM was one of the first movies he ever watched and it inspired Batman Begins.
    I didn't know that. Very interesting. Nolan mentioned during his last interview that SW, Blade Runner and the Bond films of that era were huge influences on him so it makes sense.

    Nolan has specifically called out OHMSS as among his favorite films (a Bond fan after my own heart). And he screened Blade Runner for the cast of Batman Begins before starting production and told them, "This is how we're going to make Batman Begins." No coincidence, of course, Rutger Hauer appearing as Mr. Earle.
    Fascinating to learn this. I hadn't considered the Hauer connection before but now that you mention it, it's obvious. He was excellent in the film too. "Didn't you get the memo".

    Love Batman Begins.

    Me too. It is my favorite Nolan film, my favorite Batman film, my favorite superhero film, and in fact one of my favorite films of all time. I just can find no fault with the film.
    Me neither. In fact, this discussion has compelled me to the give the entire trilogy another viewing soon.

    I'm actually tempted to myself. I've never cared for TDK as a follow up apart from Ledger's brilliant performance and Ekhart being a great Dent, but TDKR brings things back solidly with a great cast, great fun, and an emotional finish.
    I'm glad to read this, because I feel the same way about TDKR (we're probably in the minority). I love the way it brings it all back together but with a grander scale than the first film. I love TDK too, but it's all about the Joker for me, while the last film brings it back to the Bat's journey.
    I've managed to salvage the quote I was referencing:

    “The globe trotting elements of “Batman Begins” mostly came from the Bond films. One of the first films I remember seeing was “The Spy Who Loved Me” and at a certain point the Bond films fixed in my head as a great example of scope and scale in large scale images. That idea of getting you to other places, of getting you along for a ride if you can believe in it — in “The Spy Who Loved Me” the Lotus Esprit turns into a submarine and its totally convincing, and it works and you go “Wow that’s incredible.”

    http://www.indiewire.com/2012/11/christopher-nolan-spends-the-knight-at-lincoln-center-5-things-learned-about-batman-and-beyond-42824/

    Presumably all the Bond films inspired Batman Begins in their own small way, but I was still right about the first film part. :b
    Thanks for this. His comments about scope, scale, going to other places and the Lotus convinces me that this is the man for the job. Let's not waste any more time.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    bondjames wrote: »
    It's no accident that Nolan gave him the part imo. I think Nolan once said that TSWLM was one of the first movies he ever watched and it inspired Batman Begins.
    I didn't know that. Very interesting. Nolan mentioned during his last interview that SW, Blade Runner and the Bond films of that era were huge influences on him so it makes sense.

    Nolan has specifically called out OHMSS as among his favorite films (a Bond fan after my own heart). And he screened Blade Runner for the cast of Batman Begins before starting production and told them, "This is how we're going to make Batman Begins." No coincidence, of course, Rutger Hauer appearing as Mr. Earle.

    You can definitely see the Blade Runner influence in how Nolan crafted The Narrows to be a polluted and rainy hellscape. Gotham City already carried a dark and dangerous image, but the thick smog and yellowish hue seems like something you'd see in the 83 film, but maybe in a blue hue.

    I'm glad Nolan was inspired visually from the film, and not narratively.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Just to nitpick: 82, not 83.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    Just to nitpick: 82, not 83.

    That's fair, though it certainly would've benefitted from another year.
  • BondAficionadoBondAficionado Former IMDBer
    Posts: 1,884
    Moonraker

    The first of Moore's JB films where things start to go south and I'm not talking about Rio. Might as well start with the obvious: too much campyness. The double-taking pigeon, the lasers, the space battle, the gondola and unfortunately, Jaws. It's certainly no crime to have a bit of campyness in any JB film, but Moonraker takes it one step too far. Having said that, they do inject some dark/serious moments into the film, like Corinne's death, or even when Bond exits the centrifuge (I'll come back to that).

    After 3 films and 6 years, Moore has eventually succumbed to the "playing it easy" mentality. He wasn't phoning it in, but you get the sense that he was so at ease, so confident of his infallibility, that he didn't try as hard. It would've been his worst performance had it not been for a few scenes. A great moment (as mentioned above) is after he exits the centrifuge... No words, but his expression says it all. The moment is 'lengthened' by making it a single shot - the longest of the movie too. You really felt that Bond was in mortal danger, which made him seem more approachable/human.

    Continuing on with Dr. Goodhead; she's very capable (flies shuttle/combat etc), has a carefree attitude and yet she feels really dull. Can't put my finger on it, but she just melts into the background. Her voice is so soft you could use it as a pillow case. But that only adds to the 'absent' effect since she never gets truly angry and shouts. She always seems distant, both towards Bond and towards the spectator. It's nothing to do with her acting though, just her character.

    The action is above par. Many scenes have become 'classics' whether you like it or not. Everyone remembers the cable car fight above Rio, the laser battle or the gondola chase (shudder). The production made good use of exterior locations, but also of Ken Adam's wonderful studio sets; like the space station for instance.

    The smaller action sequences are also a treat to watch. The glass warehouse scene has a good balance of humour and danger, and it's beautifully lit. Another example would have to be the snake fight. Yes, it's a fake snake, but it still looks real enough. The anaconda has the clear advantage underwater, which makes it so very different to other 'balanced' fights. Barry does his name justice by introducing some hauntingly beautiful music during this scene. It's also quite a tragic sound, usually something you'd hear when a villain's fate is sealed. One can even hear some kind of (Egyptian?) flute in the background which evokes the image of the snake. Bravo Barry. Bravo.

    In the end, MR pushes the boundaries to the point where we question the purpose of a Bond film. Are they just popcorn flicks with excessive action and beautiful women? Or could the films be smarter than this? Every viewer will have their deeply-rooted opinion of MR because it is on one side of the Bond spectrum and depending on your view, you automatically answer the question above.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited July 2017 Posts: 23,883
    I honestly can't objectively defend MR, but I have a blast with it every time. There's something tremendously extravagant and OTT about the whole thing, but still grounded (thanks mainly to Barry, but also due to some of the more intense sequences sprinkled around like centrifuge, Corinne's death, the poison sequence, globe shootdown sequence etc. etc.).

    While I don't rank Moore's performance as great in this film, I don't think he's phoning it in (as evidenced by some of the more intense sequences mentioned). Rather, I think he's playing it as he has to, given the tone of the film. I don't think there's one spot where his delivery, approach and demeanour doesn't suit the narrative. They were going for camp and he nailed it. If he'd played it like he did TMWTGG or FYEO it would have seemed odd.

    I get your point about Chiles as Holly @BondAficionado. I didn't enjoy her performance for years on account of it. A bit distant, remote and cold. However, I've grown to really like her character over the years. She brings a different (and less seductive) approach to the 'equal to Bond' spy than her immediate predecessor, and I think that was the right way to play it given TSWLM's iconic & renown status. I think it was appropriate for the film as well. She plays the 'straight man (woman)' to Bond's joker. In a way, her somewhat icy demeanour was a bit 'ahead' for its time (I see a bit of Pussy/Vesper coolness in her) too.
  • BondAficionadoBondAficionado Former IMDBer
    Posts: 1,884
    For Your Eyes Only

    After trudging through MR, it only gets worse. This is the only instance in the entire franchise where it breaks the tradition of "worse/ better/ worse" JB film. FYEO simply lacks fun and energy - the things that MR succeeded at. I.e. MR was able to do something very well (has larger negatives too). Whereas FYEO is mediocre on every front.

    The opening moment is bittersweet, however it soon derails once Bond gets into the helicopter, piloted by none other than "Blofeld". Ugh. Slow clap to EON for thinking that they were being edgy by avoiding legal issues whilst still including the character. No one can defend this epitome of lackluster writing. Afterwards we are introduced to the title-song, which belongs in the bottom 3 of all time. (Don't even get me started on Binder's obsession with Easton.) The tune is slow, predictable and bland....Fits the film perfectly!!!

    One of the film's redeeming qualities is Sir Roger I must say. An improvement over his (still decent) "by the numbers" approach in the previous movie. Here he plays it less for laughs and adds more gravitas to his line delivery by not overdoing anything. Bouquet and Moore work well off one another imo. The age difference doesn't bother me as much as it should. Maybe because she isn't trying to impress him or win his attention.

    The plot itself is good but not anything remarkable. They wanted a story that was more down to Earth [pun intended], which they got, but it really is bland. A device needs to be recovered before the Soviets get it, and a girl is revenging her parents.. That's it. And let's not forget that Max the parrot saves Bond's reputation. What doesn't make sense is the scene right after with Q. Bond walks in, a joke, and then he says he knows of someone else that can help him. He could of just asked Colombo without wasting time. Anyway, the ending has the most bleak finale imo. Yes, the climbing bit is great, as is the score at that moment, but once they get up there nothing exciting happens. Bond throwing the device off the cliff is a cop out and Melina not killing Kristatos a disappointment, and that is a huge understatement.

    The ensemble is probably the worst in the franchise. The villain is forgettable, Bibi is...Bibi, Ferrara is badly used and Locque is probably my most hated character ever. Colombo is great though. Like the scenes between him and Bond on his boat. Q gets two scenes which is nice. Side note: Never realised before that when Q enters a code to open that machine room, it plays a slow TSWLM tune - the same one we hear when Bond and Anya are on the Egyptian boat.

    In conclusion, FYEO is one of the most, if not the most bland Bond film. The locations, the girls, the allies, the villains and the action scenes are all sub-par imho.

    Next up: Octopussy
  • Posts: 6,857
    There are two Bonds that i wish were scored by Barry, FYEO and LTK!
Sign In or Register to comment.