Last Bond Movie You Watched

1325326328330331

Comments

  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    Posts: 3,464
    Birdleson wrote: »
    Though I saw it about a eight times in the first month of its release, which I do with all Bond films, regardless of how I felt about them, I have a lot of trouble sitting through it now. Even the parts I used to like. Maybe because I know where it’s leading, but I can’t remain interested for very long. A lot of it is the soap opera. I have zero interest in Bond, Madeline and the kid as a plot point.

    Exactly! I can still watch it before, but I just can't stand it now.
    I feel that this film was also overrated, many people ranking this high, recency bias maybe?
  • Posts: 2,161
    Still far more entertaining than SP, though I’d more likely watch SP.
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    Posts: 3,464
    Birdleson wrote: »
    Still far more entertaining than SP, though I’d more likely watch SP.

    I like SP, I found Craig's performance in SP better than NTTD, at least he's being Bond.
    In NTTD, it's still good but he's not being Bond, in some scenes I see Craig playing himself not Bond, and in some scenes, Bond was doing some "out of character" moments.
  • edited May 2022 Posts: 2,161
    Having just watched SF again, I’m even more solidly in the column that feels that Craig should have stopped right there. It certainly leaves one wanting more, but the direction they chose to go in has not been very pleasant or fulfilling for me personally, which ultimately is all that matters to me. I would be looking back at his run gloriously as the near highlight of the series if he had stopped there. A wonderful three film body of work, more than enough to be proud of. The last two, in far different ways, have been such a disappointment that I no longer look back on his run positively. I mostly feel frustration and annoyance at missed opportunities. Post SF, either Craig could have sprung forward into a series of independent, fresh and exciting adventures, not mired down by this maudlin overarching storyline, or he could have stopped there and we could have been well into the next guy right now.
  • Posts: 7,006
    Quantum of Solace (2008)
    Well, I upgraded my bluray to 4k, not sure it adds much, always thought QOS was beautifully shot anyway ( more so than SF, which seems to get more praise!!). Anyway, this is still a superb watch, have watched it so many times now, that it even feels way shorter than its run time! QOS is seriously challenging CR as my favourite Craig Bond movie! It has it all, good story, strong characters, terrific score, visually gorgeous ( that glorious swooping shot of Italy right after the car chase is magnificent!) thrilling action and Craig is so compelling as Bond. Top 10 film, and I can see it going further up my ranking in the future!
  • Posts: 7,006
    Diamonds Are Forever (1971)
    It was on yesterday evening on T.V. so gave it a watch ( this is after viewing QOS on 4k bluray, couldnt be more different!)
    I still think there are wonderful scenes in this, and its a guilty pleasure somewhat. Am reading Flemings novel at the moment, ( now realise where the mud bath moment in the pts comes from!) and it couldnt be more different, I wish they had kept the horse racing angle from the book, and grounded it more, rather than having a giant frickin laser in Space! I really wonder what it would have developed as, if Lazenby stayed on? As it is, its a bit of a mess and missed opportunities!
  • Posts: 7,006
    Goldfinger (1964)
    On the big screen on Tuesday evening. Not as big a crowd as last weeks FRWL ( maybe they didn't want to go after its failure to play due to "technical issues!")
    Not sure the print was that good as promised, but nevertheless great to see it in its proper setting! And despite the crowd probably being fans like myself, they all laughed at the one liners, and seemed enthralled in its iconic moments! On to 'Thunderball' next week. Ticket booked!
  • Mathis1 wrote: »
    Quantum of Solace (2008)
    Well, I upgraded my bluray to 4k, not sure it adds much, always thought QOS was beautifully shot anyway ( more so than SF, which seems to get more praise!!). Anyway, this is still a superb watch, have watched it so many times now, that it even feels way shorter than its run time! QOS is seriously challenging CR as my favourite Craig Bond movie! It has it all, good story, strong characters, terrific score, visually gorgeous ( that glorious swooping shot of Italy right after the car chase is magnificent!) thrilling action and Craig is so compelling as Bond. Top 10 film, and I can see it going further up my ranking in the future!

    Well said. QOS is my own favorite of Craig's, just edging out SF. As you say, both QOS and SF have superb cinematography. They are in my opinion the two best looking Bond films.
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    edited July 2022 Posts: 3,464
    Just finished Goldeneye (1995).....

    It's a good film, but not one of the best as people making it out to be.
    So here's some points:

    Pros:
    1. The characters, I liked the characters here, I find Xenia Onatopp creepy and scary, yet she's a bit OTT for me, but still good, Natalya Simonova, a very realistic Bond Girl, she had great chemistry with Brosnan, I really liked their relationship, she had many traumatic experiences, Boris Grishenko was also good, great acting from Alan Cummings. Zukovsky and Jack Wade are good too.
    The Russian Characters were believable and realistic here compared to the previous Bond films.
    2. Alec Trevelyan was a great villain, Bond's evil reflection, can physically hold his own and defend himself without being this big boss who relies on henchman, he's not like that, he's great, though he needed a lot more screentime to fleshed out the character a bit, Sean Bean's acting was great, and he's really charismatic and cool.
    3. The action in the third act, great those Saint Petersburg scenes, I'm really laughing at those scenes, really entertaining.
    4. Some of the violent scenes really creeped me out.
    5. Judi Dench's entrance as M was great.
    6. I also liked Tanner, though again, needed more screentime.


    Cons:
    1. The transitions from one scene to another, was it the editing? Whatever that was, the fading of each scenes, the transition of PTS to the title sequence, I'm not a fan of it.
    2. Brosnan's acting was a bit stiff in this one, preferred his later performances, it's like he's still finding his path here.
    3. General Ourumov, not a fan of him, didn't liked him, his acting was not good, some of his facial expressions were corny especially his eyes, he's a bit annoying.
    4. It's a bit long, there are some flat scenes, the action happened later, almost in the third half when Trevelyan revealed himself as the villain.
    5. The score, I didn't liked it, I liked Serra's score in the main theme with Tina Turner, but his score inside the film, didn't liked it, it's corny.
    6. The plot was a bit confusing to me, maybe I need to rewatch this film again, but I'm not sure when, but that's what I'm afraid of, I didn't find this film rewatchable.
    7. Izabella Scorupco's voice was a bit weird, it's deep and she almost sounded like a man.
    8. Not a fan of the cinematography
    9. I do find Samantha Bond quite underwhelming in this one, preferred her in TWINE, her best Moneypenny scene yet.

    Next: On To Goldfinger (1965).....
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    Posts: 3,464
    Goldfinger 1964

    It's great! Seeing the 60's America, the buildings, the boards and all in the eyes of new generation like me, was actually surprising.

    It's also rewatchable because the action happens so quickly.

    Here's some points about the film:

    Pros:
    1. This film was where Connery showed a bit of vulnerability and softness when he witnessed the deaths of Jill and Tilly Masterson, M even warned him about Personal Vendetta, even though, he still tried to keep his cool in such situations in order to succeed, yes, if he goes into his emotions, there's a possibility that he couldn't beat Goldfinger and Oddjob.
    2. The action happened so quickly, which is great, it's fast paced, the golf sections were a bit long but the actions of each characters (particularly Bond) was funny, so not boring at all.
    3. For a 60's film, the cinematography was lively and bright.
    4. Connery was charismatic and really every woman's man, he's attractive and very manly, so his performance.
    5. It's the birth of Cinematic Bond, this is where the Fleming Bond and Cinematic Bond separates.
    6. Goldfinger was great as a villain, though he's comical than menacing, but the threat was still there, he's not as scary as say Silva or Sanchez, but in terms of entertainment factor, he's great.
    7. The plot was really improved upon the novel, even Bond admitted it.
    8. The set designs was great.
    9. The score was both haunting and great, John Barry never disappoints.
    10. The characters were also lively and entertaining
    11. Oddjob was creepy
    12. Bond's seduction of Pussy Galore in the barn, I don't find it offensive this time around, it's a proof that Bond's charms could turn a villain, and I think Pussy deserves it because she's a villain.
    13. It's rewatchable, it's enjoyable.

    Cons:

    1. Some of the dubbing here was obvious
    2. There's some languages here (was it Swiss or German?) I don't understand, also some of the dialogues where I need to play it backward again to understand.
    3. Some of the scenes didn't aged well here, like Bond's ass-slapping of Dink, it's a bit off for me.
    4. I felt pity for Tilly Masterson, it's she who deserves to be the main Bond Girl, this is where I think the book was better, at least in the book we got to know more of her, she spent a long time at least, her death in the book was much more impactful than the film.
    5. Bond being a damsel in distress here, Connery's performance here was great, but the character Bond himself was a bit of helpless, he's captured all the time, he didn't do much, actually Felix Leiter did a bit more here than Bond, that I'm starting to think that the main Protagonist here was Felix Leiter with Bond being just a supporting character, again I think this is where the book's better, at least Bond was given a bit more to do in the book, he do actual spying like Bond working as Goldfinger's secretary along with Tilly, while writing a back up request letter to Felix and CIA in secret, and he also got the opportunity to know all of the gangsters that Goldfinger had in the meeting.
    6. Speaking again of Pussy Galore, I don't think she deserves to be the main Bond Girl, aside from she's a villain, she's antagonistic of Bond for her whole scene, even when Bond seduced her it got me thinking like "okay, he'd turned her, but why she's still executing Goldfinger's plans?", until it's later revealed that she helped CIA foil Goldfinger's plan, that's when I realise that she's actually good, I still don't understand her actions from the start, like would she become good or not, bit blurry for me, maybe I need to rewatch it again.

    Overall, it's a great Bond film.....

    Next: On to Thunderball (1965)


  • goldenswissroyalegoldenswissroyale Switzerland
    Posts: 4,411
    @MI6HQ I'm interested in your thoughts about TB. I watched it recently and was more underwhelmed than I expected. It falls in my ranking every year. I even realized that I like YOLT much more at the moment. So much more fun to watch. YOLT doesn't make much sense but it is entertaining and never boring compared to TB.

    TB has three huge pros for me: beautiful girls, sharks and the very good SPECTRE meeting. But there are more cons than usual . . .

    The fact that Bond isn't doing much in the Kentucky section in GF is also a main issue for me and the main reason why it stays out of my top ten.
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    edited July 2022 Posts: 3,464
    @MI6HQ I'm interested in your thoughts about TB. I watched it recently and was more underwhelmed than I expected. It falls in my ranking every year. I even realized that I like YOLT much more at the moment. So much more fun to watch. YOLT doesn't make much sense but it is entertaining and never boring compared to TB.

    TB has three huge pros for me: beautiful girls, sharks and the very good SPECTRE meeting. But there are more cons than usual . . .

    The fact that Bond isn't doing much in the Kentucky section in GF is also a main issue for me and the main reason why it stays out of my top ten.

    Yes, I will share it here after watching it.

    And yes, we share the same feelings towards GF, Bond was too much of a damsel in distress the whole movie, that's why I consider this almost a Felix Leiter movie, because it's Felix who did more in this film than Bond himself.

    To be honest, it's my first time watching those Connery ones, haven't watched them before (I've only seen some clips of DN on YouTube but haven't watched it full).
  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing Long Neck Ice Cold Beer Never Broke My Heart
    Posts: 4,482
    Octopussy

    One of Roger's best outings. He should have left after this one.
  • edited July 2022 Posts: 7,006
    Octopussy

    One of Roger's best outings. He should have left after this one.

    Agreed
    Having him literally sail off into the sunset with Octopussy was a perfect exit for Rog!
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    edited July 2022 Posts: 3,464
    Thunderball (1965)

    Good film, but it's full of underwater sequences, it's damn too long!
    There some scenes like I felt was a bit repetitive.
    Here's some points:

    Pros:
    1. I felt nervous in every scene with Largo, particularly when Bond arrived at his scenes, every scene of them, there's a tension and thrill, I can't help but to take my eyes and hold my pillow tight at some scenes due to tense, like "will Largo find out that it's Bond? Will they encounter at a bad situation?", And I also felt nervous when Bond was investigating at Palmyra, I'm quite afraid that Largo's henchman might surprise and knock him, thankfully, it didn't happened.
    2. Largo was a menacing villain, and I think Adolfo Celi did a great job, but he's far from the Largo that Fleming described, that at some point, I think Klaus Maria Brandauer (from NSNA) nailed.
    3. Fiona Volpe was also great, she's menacing, but still keeping her sexiness and coolness.
    4. The killings of some characters were also creepy, also Barry's score helped to increase that creepiness when there's a surprise and when someone's going to be killed.
    5. Bond was the main man again here, after just almost being a side character in Goldfinger, he had the most work.
    6. Everytime Domino was telling the story of the bond between her and her brother, Francoise Derval, I felt that certain closeness between them.
    7. The scene where Domino knew that her brother was dead, it's sad and I felt it, I think Claudine Auger nailed that part when she teared.
    8. The plot was easy to understand

    Cons:

    1. Speaking of Domino, she's a decent Bond Girl, she felt like a proper Bond Girl compared to Pussy Galore and more likeable. But I just wished we got to see more of her complexity, the problem was the film played her more like just an eye candy in the majority of the film's scenes, her appearances were almost like that of Tiffany Case where she just mostly appeared in Bikinis or underwear, just to show that she's sexy, but forgot to build her character more.
    2. The editing, not a fan of it, there's some scenes where it's really slow, the sped up action scenes was laughable and weird, the underwater scenes, it's really long.
    3. There's some foreshadowings in this film, which made the killing of some characters seemed predictable, the feeding of shark before the execution of a failed henchman in that same fashion, I predicted it like "yes, those sharks, they would fed him to a shark!".
    4. Barry's score, yes it heightened some tensions, but there's some scenes where the score wasn't necessary (the score in the Junkanoo scenes for examples, there's already a sound from the parade, yet the score was still playing, like it messed up), also it's a bit repetitive, like are they no other scores, particularly the 007 theme was played many times, also the score in the underwater action scenes towards the end I think should be more bombastic.
    5. There's so many characters.
    6. Some repetitive scenes, like Bond going in and out of Palmyra for some investigations, he went there in the first half, went back there in the second half, and Bond in and out of Hotel.
    7. There's just so many unnecessary scenes going on here.
    8. Connery's age here was getting obvious, or maybe it's his hairpiece? I don't know, but he aged a bit here.
    9. Full of underwater scenes.

    Next: On To For Your Eyes Only (1981)
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 5,132
    @MI6HQ Terrence Young left in post production and left the film in quite a mess and disarray. Peter Hunt to the rescue, though even his editing skills didn't fix all the mistakes. You will notice that Bond is wearing the red shirt and blue trunks while meeting Domino, then we head to the casino, then Bond is back in red shirt and blue trunks again. The original continuity had Bond meeting Domino, then heading to his hotel and getting the goon in the shower and then heading to the casino. I am drawing a blank on why they put the night casino action in between. Someone more knowledgeable than I might shed light.

    Remember for Barry's score. He originally had Mister Kiss Kiss Bang Bang as the title and wove the instrumental through the film, then someone decided the theme song needed to have Thunderball in it. So he had to write and record that.

    Connery was in the best shape of his life having just filmed "The Hill". However he did looked aged. Could it be his workload was causing him some stress.
  • goldenswissroyalegoldenswissroyale Switzerland
    edited July 2022 Posts: 4,411
    I'm with you @MI6HQ when it comes to the (in our opinion) "too long" underwater scenes and good that you mention Barry's score in the junkanoo scene. I don't like this scene at all due to the annoying sounds. The noise at this junkanoo isn't for my taste (I definitely wouldn't visit it when I had the chance) and the 007 theme (?) makes it even worse there. The theme is okay in the end battle but I can't stand it at the junkanoo. This scene is a bit boring anyway and I'm also not a fan of Fiona's death. This whole part of the movie is one of my least liked scenes of the series.
    A lot of the fans say that TWINE or SP are a bit boring. Maybe, but TB beats them all (of course only my feeling). A solid film, but the only one where I would fall asleep after a hard day.
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    edited July 2022 Posts: 3,464
    For Your Eyes Only (1981)

    This film never disappoints me, a great combination of drama, action, thrill with a small touch of mystery.
    It's Moore's most serious performance of Bond, I liked that he bleeds in this film.
    This film might be ahead of its time.
    I really liked his relationship with Melina Havelock, him being this father figure to her and a bit of mentor too.

    And I liked Melina as a Bond Girl, yes, she surpassed all of the Previous Bond Girls I've previously seen so far (Natalya, Domino and Pussy - not a fan of Pussy, sorry 😔).

    This film have little amounts of flaws for me.

    To be honest, this is the film I enjoyed the most in my Bond marathon, yes moreso than the previous ones I've seen so far (GE, GF and TB).

    Since I liked the film overall, I'm just going to list only the cons, or the flaws of the film that I've mentioned earlier.

    1. Conti's score in the PTS, liked his score overall, but not a fan of the PTS score, but apart from that, all of his score worked well in the film and I liked it.
    2. Bibi Dahl, she's a bit annoying, didn't liked her interactions with Bond, their scenes together was cringe. But I do felt pity for her and her trainer Brink towards the end at the St. Cyril.
    3. Kristatos was just an ok villain, not the worst, but not the best either.
    4. Sheena Easton showing in the Title Sequence, not quite a fan of it, and her face was a bit angry, her eyebrows was a bit scowled.
    5. The Thatcher couple (they're mentioned here many times, so that's how I got the name), not a fan of that scene, felt out of place for this film, I think it would work better in a goofy film like A View To A Kill.
    6. Because of Moore's Age, some of the romantic scenes felt a bit uncomfortable.

    But the rest were all a Pros for me..... ;)

    Next: On to The Man With The Golden Gun
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    edited July 2022 Posts: 3,464
    The Man With The Golden Gun (1974)

    Finished watching it, and...... It's not that good. 😅
    I've cringed at some scenes, it didn't aged well.

    Christopher Lee was a great actor and he really had that menace in him, but this film didn't gave him any favors either, the film was so comical and this film didn't gave him a chance to shine more on that menace, his portrayal had been overshadowed by the tone of the film. Christopher Lee deserved better than this, he's one of the highlights in this film, and it's a shame.

    Also another highlight was Maud Adams as Andrea Anders, I do liked her complexity and seriousness.

    Nick Nack was also fun and quite a bit menacing, but still not on par with other henchmen in the series, he's decent I think.

    But apart from that, this film is so confusing with Cringey scenes, particularly those with Saida, those treatment with women, the plot was muddled, like I don't get what's going on, the plot centered around Bond's assassination turned into a blurry plot about Solex Agitator.
    Mary Goodnight was really a dumb bond girl, one of my least favorites so far.
    The characters aren't interesting.
    This film didn't aged well really.

    The majority of this film were all a cons for me, I'm afraid.

    I'll admit, I laughed at some jokes though, especially those scenes with Sheriff JW Pepper (but even his scenes here quite a bit unnecessary either), but still entertained me, but that's just about it.

    Next: On To Live And Let Die (1973)
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    edited July 2022 Posts: 3,464
    Live And Let Die (1973)

    It's a good film, I have a better time watching this than The Man With The Golden Gun, it's more entertaining, and comparing to The Man With The Golden Gun, it aged well.
    The characters were a bit fun this time, the treatment of women wasn't still that good (the way both Solitaire and Rosie Carver are written), but it didn't comes across as offensive like how TMWTGG treated those female characters.

    Anyways, here's some points regarding Moore's first Bond film:

    PROS:

    1. There's some scenes where brightened me because it came from the novel like Mr. BIG teasing Solitaire to use her psychic powers or else he would break Bond's finger, that's straight from the novel.
    2. The characters were entertaining like I've said.
    3. The film was entertaining in general.
    4. Some killing of the characters were a bit surprising to me.
    5. Moore as Bond was great in this, but his age was quite showing, but still good.
    6. Sheriff JW Pepper suits this film well than in the TMWTGG.
    7. Felix Leiter was good as always.

    CONS:

    1. There's also some scenes where I easily predicted what's going to happen, like Rosie Carver being a traitor, or there's some things there that Bond might use to save himself.
    2. I don't understand the plot quite a little bit, I thought Mr. BIG's plot was something to do with United Nations and Diplomacy, hence the killing of the British Representative in United Nations meeting at the beginning of the film. But later, he explained that it's something to do with drugs? Okay.....But I don't mind it that much because it entertained me by the way.
    4. Also Bond's watch with Multiple gadgets, like it saved him many times, I often wonder what if he didn't have the watch, how could he get himself out with only using his wits? Particularly towards the end where Mr. BIG both tied him with Solitaire? This is the film where Bond relied much on gadgets except that Crocodile farm scene.
    5. The villain (Mr. BIG/Dr. Kananga) was just okay, but I find his henchmen were far more intimidating than him 😅.
    6. The way the female characters written as both Damsel in Distress, but it's a lot better than the writing on both Goodnight and Anders though.
    7. The motorboat chase scene was quite a bit long, I felt like it's an endless scene, reminds of the Thunderball underwater scenes.
    8. When Bond arrived in New York, and it's him who got controlled the car, the camera there was a bit shaky, it made me dizzy a bit.

    It's quite a middling entry in my previous viewings so far, but far better than the film succeeded this.
    Fun and entertaining.

    Next: On to You Only Live Twice (1967)
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    edited July 2022 Posts: 3,464
    You Only Live Twice (1967)

    Hmmmm..... The supposed to be Last Hurrah for Connery's Bond.
    I have a good time watching this, it's a good film but not some sort of where I'm coming back to watch it again, but I have a good memory of enjoying it.

    Here's some points:

    Pros:

    1. The score, it's good though not Barry's best, but it's a lot better than Thunderball.
    2. It's amazing to see Japan in 60's!
    3. The action scenes are great.
    4. The plot was very easy to follow and understand.
    5. I laughed at some of the goofy scenes in this film.
    6. The Little Nellie was also good.
    7. It's a treat to see Bond in Naval Uniform.
    8. It's quite entertaining, much better than Thunderball in terms of action and pacing, it's a bit more energized compared to Thunderball, except Connery.

    Cons:

    1. Connery looked bored here, there are some scenes where it's obvious, the energy and his engagement to the role was already gone by this point, he's no longer engaged to the Bond role and it shows.
    2. Some dialogues didn't aged well, but hey, it's 60's!
    3. Connery's makeup in Japanese was utterly laughable and ridiculous.
    4. The cinematography was not that good, it's quite dull.
    5. The camera work wasn't good either, it's a bit distracting at times, like the camera was held by a nervous hands.
    6. Some acting of the cast wasn't natural or organic, it's forced except the actor who played Tiger Tanaka, and Akiko Wakabayashi who played Aki.
    7. Kissy Suzuki wasn't a good Bond Girl, she's just an eye candy, when the scene of Bond marrying Kissy was getting near, I lost my gripe on the film, I felt down, thankfully Bond's investigation of Blofeld's base happened quickly shortly after the marriage.
    8. The look of this film was dated, I mean the example of this being Kissy looking at Bond at the boat like that look of her, was it just copy pasted there? 😅 The movements of the characters, it looked dated.
    9. It's entertaining, but the plot was a bit outlandish, Bond was escapism, but it's too outlandish for Bond.

    Next: On To Moonraker (1979), another Space, rockets related extravaganza!
  • Posts: 5,905
    As mentioned in another thread, I went to see OHMSS this afternoon. It was the only Bond movie I never saw in a theater (I was too young to see it when it came out in 1969, and everytime there were reprises of Bond movies in the theaters, that one was forgotten ; not to mention the few times when I missed it, either because I didn't know it was on, or I wasn't there, or I couldn't go). So, I took advantage of the festival currently going on in Paris to finally see it. And, even if I has seen it a few times before (on VHS, DVD and on the telly), it didn't lose its appeal for me. Great cast, lovely ladies, great villains, great action scenes, beautiful scenery. What's not to like ?

    One detail I noticed, though : I didn't know that portugese casinos used francs instead of escudos.
  • Posts: 2,161
    Sounds fun @Gerard . The three I missed in the theatre were FRWL (I was too young =, but when my parents did take me to see GF in '65 DN was on the bill), OHMSS (my mother wasn't interested in Lazenby, though I did go to a retro screening in San Francisco, with a few MI6 members, a couple of years back), and TND (at that point I felt like it wasn't my franchise anymore, plus i was going through a divorce and was distracted). TND still remains the one EON Bond film the I have not seen on the big screen.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,683
    DN

    It's been a year since I saw a Bond film other than NTTD. I wanted to wait until next month to start my Bondathon but it's James Bond Day so I had to watch one and settled on DN, which usually ends up in my Top 3 (or Top 5 at the "worst"). It's about as perfect, succinct, and exotic as a Bond film gets for me, the absolutely perfect formula and sensational pacing that we'll likely never get out of a Bond film again.
  • 007InAction007InAction Australia
    Posts: 2,375
    Creasy47 wrote: »
    DN

    It's been a year since I saw a Bond film other than NTTD. I wanted to wait until next month to start my Bondathon but it's James Bond Day so I had to watch one and settled on DN, which usually ends up in my Top 3 (or Top 5 at the "worst"). It's about as perfect, succinct, and exotic as a Bond film gets for me, the absolutely perfect formula and sensational pacing that we'll likely never get out of a Bond film again.

    DN is my favourite.
    It's majestic.
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    edited October 2022 Posts: 3,464
    I think DN always gets a little attention (or dare I say it, a bit overlooked).

    While it may not be on the par with other films that came after it, it's still a great Bond film, and therefore, a historic moment in the Bond franchise.

    Edit: I will post here my review of Moonraker.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou. I can still hear my old hound dog barkin'.
    Posts: 8,826
    I could have mentioned his on the "Last Movie You Watched" thread as well, but I decided on this.

    Tonight I suddenly felt the urge to watch MOONRAKER again. A movie that I refused to see at the cinema at the time, since I felt then it was preposterous to let Bond go to space just because Star Wars was the rage. It turned out differently once DVDs (or maybe even VHS tapes) were available. I really got into that movie, taking it for what it is: Really just the epitome of a Bond satire, with everything so ironic that nobody could really be expected to take it seriously.

    Based on that assumption, I once more enjoyed myself totally, being able to recite most of the dialogue beforehand and having a ball abou that. And yes, there's a bunch of technical stuff that doesn't add up, but that's something that one can say about any other Bond movie as well.

    At any rate, I found MR totally enjoyable once more, and based on that factor, it is probably my favourite Moore film by now.
  • Posts: 463
    “You left this with Ferrara, I believe…”

    I decided to follow up Diamonds Are Forever with 1981’s For Your Eyes Only.

    This one is a bit of a mixed bag for me. I really, really appreciate them going back to the source material and bringing back a harder edged tone that was largely ignored in Moonraker, but it seems like it was at the expense of the larger than life characters, sets, or action set pieces that the series is known for. I like that the plot harkens back to From Russia With Love, but find that there’s very little suspense leading up to Bond retrieving the ATAC. I think had the film made Bond’s mission more time sensitive, that would have helped upped the ante.

    I do like the villains, even if they tend to be somewhat forgettable. I enjoy Charles Dance and Michael Gothard in their roles, even if never of them really speak a word. Kriegler is just another Red Grant clone, but he is serviceable in his part.

    I like the Bond girls, and like Melina as a character, but Bibi is so out of place… I know they were trying to play into Roger’s age, but they should have just casted older females opposite of him, rather than writing in a character like her. On the flip side, Moore has real chemistry with Cassandra Harris, and although her role is brief, I buy her and Bond’s romance. Her death is a tragic moment in the film, perfectly played by Moore.

    Roger himself is on absolute fire in this film. Anybody who tries to say that he couldn’t act definitely needs to go back and study his performances. He is excellent here. One of my favorite moments in the entire series is him finally confronting Locque, where he throws the dove pin in his car and then kicks it off the cliff. I appreciate the harder hitting action in general, the keelhauling sequence and the rock climbing sequence in particular are major standouts. I find that some of the skiing and car chase stuff is a bit over long, but I still enjoy it for the most part.

    I think what hurts the film the most is the uneven tone. I love Bond visiting Tracy’s grave, but then you have that parody of Blofeld attacking Bond, which kind of makes a mockery out of the entire situation. I get why they did it with the rights and all that, but I definitely think it was an error on the filmmaker’s part. Same thing with the end of the movie, the Margaret Thatcher scene comes out of nowhere and it’s so superfluous to everything that has come before it.

    I find the theme song to be underrated - the rest of the soundtrack is a bit hit or miss for me but I do enjoy parts of it.

    Overall, a really, really enjoyable Bond film IMO, even if my current ranking of it doesn’t exactly look like that.

    1. On Her Majesty’s Secret Service
    2. GoldenEye
    3. Dr. No
    4. The Living Daylights
    5. For Your Eyes Only
    6. Tomorrow Never Dies
    7. Diamonds Are Forever
  • Posts: 463
    “Shocking… positively shocking…”

    I watched For Your Eyes Only last week. Today the follow up was Goldfinger.

    This was the first Bond I ever watched. I couldn’t have been more than four or five but I distinctly remember the impression Connery pulling off his wetsuit to reveal that white tuxedo had on me. It was my favorite for a long time, and I still rate it very highly. Its status as the “best” or “greatest” is certainly well deserved. Sharp direction, cracking dialogue and great performances make this a top-tier Bond. Connery is the embodiment of everything James Bond should be. He commands the screen in every frame he’s in. Easily my favorite Bond and his performances contribute to my love for the 60’s films. To this day, when I think “James Bond,” the first image that comes to mind is Connery in that white dinner jacket.

    The whole cast is solid. Gert Frobe remains one of my favorite villains in the series. There are many moments with him that I like, one that sticks out in particular is just how excited he gets as Bond deduces his plans over mint juleps. Oddjob is another classic villain. I really love is how the fight between Bond and Oddjob is the exact opposite of the one in From Russia With Love. In the train car, it’s a fast paced, close quarters fight to the death. In the vaults, it’s slower and more methodical with Oddjob simply wasting time fighting Bond until the bomb detonates. He doesn’t say anything other than a couple of grunts throughout the movie, but he has a great menacing presence. Honor Blackman does a great job with her role, but as a character she doesn’t really do a whole lot for me. She isn’t bad, I just rate some of the others higher. Cec Linder is okay as Felix. He’s just sort of there for me. I love the little old lady who guards the entrance to the factory. Such a hilarious little moment you’d only see in a Bond film.

    This film is a great example of how to use gadgets correctly. I love the DB5. I think it may have lost a little bit of its mystique and allure by appearing so frequently in the Craig films, but I still love it. There’s a small reference to From Russia With Love when Bond asks the flight attendant for his attache case, and she responds that it was damaged when examined. I’d like to think that Goldfinger’s personnel set the case’s tear gas cartridges off. The smirk on Bond’s face says it all, and I’ve always loved that little moment.

    John Barry delivers another excellent soundtrack, and Bassey’s title track absolutely deserves its iconic status.

    I really do enjoy the entire film from beginning to end. The only thing I can say somewhat negatively is the pacing does slow somewhat when Bond gets kidnapped. We spend quite a bit of time with those goofy mobsters before Goldfinger has them offed, and then we follow Oddjob as he kills Solo and crushes the body. Another thing I typically enjoy is the travelogue aspect of these films, and while Switzerland looks gorgeous, Kentucky isn’t exactly the most unique or exotic looking location.

    1. On Her Majesty’s Secret Service
    2. Goldfinger
    3. GoldenEye
    4. Dr. No
    5. The Living Daylights
    6. For Your Eyes Only
    7. Tomorrow Never Dies
    8. Diamonds Are Forever
  • Currently watching Living Daylights on my lunch break at work on Amazon Prime. What a great film it still is. Just wish Felix Leiter was written better but apart from that almost a perfect film.
Sign In or Register to comment.