Controversial opinions about Bond films

1545546548550551705

Comments

  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing Long Neck Ice Cold Beer Never Broke My Heart
    Posts: 4,423
    Daniel316 wrote: »
    DAD wasn't the cause of the reboot though, a reboot had been on the table since TLD and they planned one once they got the CR rights back in 2000 I think it was. So a Reboot was inevitable regardless of how DAD did (it made the most out of any bond film up to that point and wasn't too badly received Critically either). Besides Bond was still doing A-Ok afterwards with all the games still being made (Nightfire, Everything Or Nothing). So no DAD wasn't the cause of the reboot like everyone falsely tries to say just so they can find a reason to crap over DAD some more, a film that isn't really deserving of all the hate it gets honestly. Also Spectre is way worse, they made Blofeld be Bond's brother, do I even need to continue there? That alone is sinful enough lol

    It didn't bother me at first, but as time goes on, it bothers me more and more. My one gripe about the Mendes films is Bond's background and personal history becoming too expansive. I don't mind the last 1/3 of Skyfall and the battle at the house. However that whole Bond history aspect should have ended there and not carry in Spectre.
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 3,985
    Daniel316 wrote: »
    DAD wasn't the cause of the reboot though, a reboot had been on the table since TLD and they planned one once they got the CR rights back in 2000 I think it was. So a Reboot was inevitable regardless of how DAD did (it made the most out of any bond film up to that point and wasn't too badly received Critically either). Besides Bond was still doing A-Ok afterwards with all the games still being made (Nightfire, Everything Or Nothing). So no DAD wasn't the cause of the reboot like everyone falsely tries to say just so they can find a reason to crap over DAD some more, a film that isn't really deserving of all the hate it gets honestly. Also Spectre is way worse, they made Blofeld be Bond's brother, do I even need to continue there? That alone is sinful enough lol

    You're not telling me that EON didn't want a complete change of direction after this 'Shark jumping' film.

    DAD is comic book fluff. The script is one long quip. Not how you go about building
    character.

    The series required a re-think and overhaul, and we got one of the best films of the series as a result.
  • Posts: 6,822

    Daniel316 wrote: »
    DAD wasn't the cause of the reboot though, a reboot had been on the table since TLD and they planned one once they got the CR rights back in 2000 I think it was. So a Reboot was inevitable regardless of how DAD did (it made the most out of any bond film up to that point and wasn't too badly received Critically either). Besides Bond was still doing A-Ok afterwards with all the games still being made (Nightfire, Everything Or Nothing). So no DAD wasn't the cause of the reboot like everyone falsely tries to say just so they can find a reason to crap over DAD some more, a film that isn't really deserving of all the hate it gets honestly. Also Spectre is way worse, they made Blofeld be Bond's brother, do I even need to continue there? That alone is sinful enough lol

    You're not telling me that EON didn't want a complete change of direction after this 'Shark jumping' film.

    DAD is comic book fluff. The script is one long quip. Not how you go about building
    character.

    The series required a re-think and overhaul, and we got one of the best films of the series as a result.

    +1
  • Daniel316Daniel316 United States
    Posts: 210
    One of the Worst films of the series when it comes to feeling like Bond imo, and no they didn't. There's 0 evidence to suggest they were planning on rebooting because of DAD "going too far". They were trying to make a 5th Brosnan movie after all. Even if it's "comic book fluff" so what? Moonraker is too and that one is also fantastic. Honestly it didn't need a rethink or overhaul, they would've been just fine keeping things how they were. Should they have made the next one exactly like DAD? No the next one should've been more grounded I agree, but it shouldn't have done what CR did and strip away what made Bond what he is imo.
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,894
    Daniel316 wrote: »
    DAD wasn't the cause of the reboot though, a reboot had been on the table since TLD and they planned one once they got the CR rights back in 2000 I think it was. So a Reboot was inevitable regardless of how DAD did (it made the most out of any bond film up to that point and wasn't too badly received Critically either). Besides Bond was still doing A-Ok afterwards with all the games still being made (Nightfire, Everything Or Nothing). So no DAD wasn't the cause of the reboot like everyone falsely tries to say just so they can find a reason to crap over DAD some more, a film that isn't really deserving of all the hate it gets honestly. Also Spectre is way worse, they made Blofeld be Bond's brother, do I even need to continue there? That alone is sinful enough lol

    Maybe not the main cause, but DAD did play its part. The main cause was The Bourne Identity, which made Bond look badly out of touch. I remember the press at the time, trying to build up a battle between Bond and xXx, and then along came Bourne, which wasn't seen as a threat, and shanked Bond good and proper.
  • Daniel316Daniel316 United States
    Posts: 210
    Yes Bourne was what made Babs and others think about changing styles. However Bourne imo didn't make Bond look dated, Bourne actually is what caused the whole downfall of Spy movies like Bond and doomed them to become Devoid of soul and personality. Really Bourne is a terrible movie and series and I couldn't give 1 toss about it. At least people aren't saying Austin Powers is what made Bond change like Craig said that one time, it was Bourne more than anything that caused Bond to change for better or for worse depending on your view.
  • NickTwentyTwoNickTwentyTwo Vancouver, BC, Canada
    edited February 2020 Posts: 7,526
    Remington wrote: »
    I'll get a few out.

    •TB is better than GF.
    •Lazenby was a better choice for OHMSS than Connery.
    •DAF isn't that bad.
    •The Brosnan era is underrated. This includes DAD, apart from the CGI and endless quips/puns.
    •Another Way to Die isn't a bad song.
    •QOS is one of the best and SF is good but overrated.
    •SP is far and away the worst of the series.

    I could be looking at my own reflection (with regards to your opinions on Lazenby, DAF, the Brosnan era, AWTD, QOS, and SF ;) )

    My controversial opinion; Spectre, despite being an enormous wasted opportunity and all the ham fisted retconning, is still one of the more enjoyable Craig entries to watch.

    *shields self*
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    edited February 2020 Posts: 8,025
    Daniel316 wrote: »
    DAD wasn't the cause of the reboot though, a reboot had been on the table since TLD and they planned one once they got the CR rights back in 2000 I think it was. So a Reboot was inevitable regardless of how DAD did (it made the most out of any bond film up to that point and wasn't too badly received Critically either). Besides Bond was still doing A-Ok afterwards with all the games still being made (Nightfire, Everything Or Nothing). So no DAD wasn't the cause of the reboot like everyone falsely tries to say just so they can find a reason to crap over DAD some more, a film that isn't really deserving of all the hate it gets honestly. Also Spectre is way worse, they made Blofeld be Bond's brother, do I even need to continue there? That alone is sinful enough lol

    DAD was NOT critically well received either if you actually look back at reviews of the time. The only difference between its release and now is that it’s reputation only got worse. TND and TWINE were also not critically received well too. It was only GE that had more favorable reviews.
  • Posts: 12,273
    My bottom 3 - DAF, DAD, and SP - all have good parts in their first two-thirds, but horrible third acts. The first two-thirds of each film are not perfect but any means, but there is a scary plunge in quality for each of them when they reach a certain point later on...
  • Posts: 12,273
    Birdleson wrote: »
    DAF vs DAD: For me DAF stays strong a little further in, and has that pretty cool ending on the ocean liner. And the dialogue is far superior to that of DAD. That gives it a good four spot advantage in my rankings.

    For me SP doesn't match up. I find there to be some reasonably okay moments in the first half, but nothing that really meets my expectations. Even my favorite scene in the film, the Mr. White segment, leaves me unfulfilled. It's mostly the implication that the first half is all set-up that makes it a decent enough experience up until then upon a first watch. And all of that would be fine and forgiven if it paid off in the second half. But, again for me, it just tanks. There are silly Bond films and uneven Bond films, but for me SP is the only boring Bond film. Someone can take it apart and point out why it works for them and so on, but that film just bores me. Even at my first viewing (a New Bond Film!), I was nodding off.

    I do have to give DAF credit for the Wint and Kidd epilogue; DAD and SP didn't have any moments that good in their third acts. Still, much of the stuff before that can be quite a drag. SP has its dull moments (mostly the third act), but for me personally moments like the PTS, Rome SPECTRE meeting, Mr. White's scene, and train fight are all worthy highlights. One moment I enjoyed in the theater a lot that I don't anymore is the snow chase in Austria which now feels like a rather tepid action sequence.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,025
    Birdleson wrote: »
    A few big name critics, like Peter Travers, loved DAD (he put it in his Top Ten list for ROLLING STONE MAGAZINE), which floored me (he wasn't alone). After a negative experience in the theatre (but even then, it was a gradually sinking as the insanity played out), I have grown to enjoy the first two-thirds (roughly) a lot over the years. At least there's that, as horrendous as the last third (and every scene with Jinx) is; which it keeps it out of the cellar in my rankings.

    I remember Roger Ebert giving it a thumbs up on his show while his then co-host Richard Roeper had a facial reaction like “are you kidding me?”

    If you go back to the rotten tomatoes for the Brosnan films at the time they came out on archive.org they were all very mixed in the 50% range. There were definitely critics who were kind to DAD, but it wasn’t as many as some conflate it to be. And this was months after the first Bourne film came out too.
  • Posts: 1,883
    The way I recall it, the first Bourne movie was pretty well received critically and at the box office, but it was the second that made its blockbuster status as the talk of a new Bond being sought and Brosnan being let go occurred.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,025
    BT3366 wrote: »
    The way I recall it, the first Bourne movie was pretty well received critically and at the box office, but it was the second that made its blockbuster status as the talk of a new Bond being sought and Brosnan being let go occurred.

    I think that’s more accurate. The first Bourne was a hit, but not something you’d assume would encourage EON to switch gears. After all, Brosnan was still in the role as far as 2004 given the video game release. Once SUPREMACY came out and showed that this wasn’t just a fluke people started to take more notice of what was working for Bourne.
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    Posts: 1,692
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Birdleson wrote: »
    DAF vs DAD: For me DAF stays strong a little further in, and has that pretty cool ending on the ocean liner. And the dialogue is far superior to that of DAD. That gives it a good four spot advantage in my rankings.

    For me SP doesn't match up. I find there to be some reasonably okay moments in the first half, but nothing that really meets my expectations. Even my favorite scene in the film, the Mr. White segment, leaves me unfulfilled. It's mostly the implication that the first half is all set-up that makes it a decent enough experience up until then upon a first watch. And all of that would be fine and forgiven if it paid off in the second half. But, again for me, it just tanks. There are silly Bond films and uneven Bond films, but for me SP is the only boring Bond film. Someone can take it apart and point out why it works for them and so on, but that film just bores me. Even at my first viewing (a New Bond Film!), I was nodding off.

    I do have to give DAF credit for the Wint and Kidd epilogue; DAD and SP didn't have any moments that good in their third acts. Still, much of the stuff before that can be quite a drag. SP has its dull moments (mostly the third act), but for me personally moments like the PTS, Rome SPECTRE meeting, Mr. White's scene, and train fight are all worthy highlights. One moment I enjoyed in the theater a lot that I don't anymore is the snow chase in Austria which now feels like a rather tepid action sequence.

    That plane sequence is so odd. I place Spectre at #1 in my rankings, but that sequence is one of the flattest in the series, and I'm not sure why.

    It's superficially impressive looking, and certainly novel, but it just does nothing for me. It's not because I don't feel Bond is in danger, either, because that applies to most Bond action sequences. It's not the stupidity (trying to steer a sliding wingless plane) either, because stupidity is not all that rare in Bond action either. It's just pretty lifeless.

    Maybe it's the Q chase sequence that goes on at the same time that overshadows it for me. I absolutely love that bit.
  • Posts: 12,273
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Birdleson wrote: »
    DAF vs DAD: For me DAF stays strong a little further in, and has that pretty cool ending on the ocean liner. And the dialogue is far superior to that of DAD. That gives it a good four spot advantage in my rankings.

    For me SP doesn't match up. I find there to be some reasonably okay moments in the first half, but nothing that really meets my expectations. Even my favorite scene in the film, the Mr. White segment, leaves me unfulfilled. It's mostly the implication that the first half is all set-up that makes it a decent enough experience up until then upon a first watch. And all of that would be fine and forgiven if it paid off in the second half. But, again for me, it just tanks. There are silly Bond films and uneven Bond films, but for me SP is the only boring Bond film. Someone can take it apart and point out why it works for them and so on, but that film just bores me. Even at my first viewing (a New Bond Film!), I was nodding off.

    I do have to give DAF credit for the Wint and Kidd epilogue; DAD and SP didn't have any moments that good in their third acts. Still, much of the stuff before that can be quite a drag. SP has its dull moments (mostly the third act), but for me personally moments like the PTS, Rome SPECTRE meeting, Mr. White's scene, and train fight are all worthy highlights. One moment I enjoyed in the theater a lot that I don't anymore is the snow chase in Austria which now feels like a rather tepid action sequence.

    That plane sequence is so odd. I place Spectre at #1 in my rankings, but that sequence is one of the flattest in the series, and I'm not sure why.

    It's superficially impressive looking, and certainly novel, but it just does nothing for me. It's not because I don't feel Bond is in danger, either, because that applies to most Bond action sequences. It's not the stupidity (trying to steer a sliding wingless plane) either, because stupidity is not all that rare in Bond action either. It's just pretty lifeless.

    Maybe it's the Q chase sequence that goes on at the same time that overshadows it for me. I absolutely love that bit.

    I agree, the scene does feel rather dull. I remember enjoying it a lot in the theater but on all my rewatches it's just so "meh." Also no offense, but putting SP at #1 is definitely a good controversial opinion!
  • LeonardPineLeonardPine The Bar on the Beach
    Posts: 3,985
    Daniel316 wrote: »
    Yes Bourne was what made Babs and others think about changing styles. However Bourne imo didn't make Bond look dated, Bourne actually is what caused the whole downfall of Spy movies like Bond and doomed them to become Devoid of soul and personality. Really Bourne is a terrible movie and series and I couldn't give 1 toss about it. At least people aren't saying Austin Powers is what made Bond change like Craig said that one time, it was Bourne more than anything that caused Bond to change for better or for worse depending on your view.

    Whether you like them or not the Bourne series gave Bond a much needed kick up the behind. They were serious, exciting spy thrillers where the protagonist relied on his wits instead of invisible cars. And the dialogue was actually how people talk, instead of an endless stream of quips and double entendres.
  • ProfJoeButcherProfJoeButcher Bless your heart
    Posts: 1,692
    FoxRox wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Birdleson wrote: »
    DAF vs DAD: For me DAF stays strong a little further in, and has that pretty cool ending on the ocean liner. And the dialogue is far superior to that of DAD. That gives it a good four spot advantage in my rankings.

    For me SP doesn't match up. I find there to be some reasonably okay moments in the first half, but nothing that really meets my expectations. Even my favorite scene in the film, the Mr. White segment, leaves me unfulfilled. It's mostly the implication that the first half is all set-up that makes it a decent enough experience up until then upon a first watch. And all of that would be fine and forgiven if it paid off in the second half. But, again for me, it just tanks. There are silly Bond films and uneven Bond films, but for me SP is the only boring Bond film. Someone can take it apart and point out why it works for them and so on, but that film just bores me. Even at my first viewing (a New Bond Film!), I was nodding off.

    I do have to give DAF credit for the Wint and Kidd epilogue; DAD and SP didn't have any moments that good in their third acts. Still, much of the stuff before that can be quite a drag. SP has its dull moments (mostly the third act), but for me personally moments like the PTS, Rome SPECTRE meeting, Mr. White's scene, and train fight are all worthy highlights. One moment I enjoyed in the theater a lot that I don't anymore is the snow chase in Austria which now feels like a rather tepid action sequence.

    That plane sequence is so odd. I place Spectre at #1 in my rankings, but that sequence is one of the flattest in the series, and I'm not sure why.

    It's superficially impressive looking, and certainly novel, but it just does nothing for me. It's not because I don't feel Bond is in danger, either, because that applies to most Bond action sequences. It's not the stupidity (trying to steer a sliding wingless plane) either, because stupidity is not all that rare in Bond action either. It's just pretty lifeless.

    Maybe it's the Q chase sequence that goes on at the same time that overshadows it for me. I absolutely love that bit.

    I agree, the scene does feel rather dull. I remember enjoying it a lot in the theater but on all my rewatches it's just so "meh." Also no offense, but putting SP at #1 is definitely a good controversial opinion!

    I am aware! :))
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,025
    The flat feel you guys refer to in the action for SP is all down to how Lee Smith edited the raw footage together. The action footage is shot by the same second unit guy who did CR and SF (Alexander Witt) and the editor of those two films was Stuart Baird, who is basically a legend in editing action blockbusters. It’s unfortunate he didn’t come back for SP, because I think he would have given the action the much needed oomph in his editing.

    For what it’s worth Alexander Witt came back for NTTD, but neither Stuart Baird or Lee Smith. Instead it’s two with Tom Cross, who’s done EXCELLENT editing that earned him an Oscar with Whiplash and Eliot Graham who’s known for some comic book films, the standout in my opinion being X2 (the White House opening action piece is as good as it gets IMO).
  • OctopussyOctopussy Piz Gloria, Schilthorn, Switzerland.
    Posts: 1,081
    Remington wrote: »
    I'll get a few out.

    •TB is better than GF.
    •Lazenby was a better choice for OHMSS than Connery.
    •DAF isn't that bad.
    •The Brosnan era is underrated. This includes DAD, apart from the CGI and endless quips/puns.
    •Another Way to Die isn't a bad song.
    •QOS is one of the best and SF is good but overrated.
    •SP is far and away the worst of the series.

    Agreed that Thunderball is better then Goldfinger.
    Lazenby was equivocally a better choice then Connery for OHMSS.
    Diamons Are Forever is bad, but not that bad, despite being low on my list. It's an entertaining romp.
    The Brosnan era was overrated, IMO. By far the worst of any of the Bond's tenures.
    AWTD is awful.
    Agreed that Skyfall is grossly overrated.
    Spectre is terrible, but I wouldn't say it's the worst Bond film.
  • Posts: 14,840
    suavejmf wrote: »
    Daniel316 wrote: »
    Suavejmf: uhhh what? A bond villain can be funny and still work, when has it ever been stated that they can't be? What kind of sense does that make lol. Seriously where did you pick that up?

    Birdleson: Yes!! Thank you I'm glad I'm not the only one who finds Charles Grey to be great, actually that's probably my controversial opinion: Charles Grey is the best Blofeld by a wide margin

    They can have wit, sure. But not an outright ‘pantomime dame’ like Carver.
    He plays a media mogul. I think if you look at current media moguls you'll find they're often 'pantomime', especially compared to bankers etc. I think he plays his role very well and love the arrogant character they made of him. He doesn't have chemistry with Lois, true, but neither does Bond. The whole common background should've been skipped. Bond should be charming enough to bed the estranged wife of a media mogul without beeing a former fling. Would've saved us the cringeworthy 'is it something I said' pun as well...

    @CommanderRoss Oh I'm so glad I'm not the only one thinking making Paris Carver a former fling was superfluous at best!
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,025
    A former flame is a good concept, but should have been done with better casting and a better written part.

    Hopefully Madeleine works better as a former flame than as the love internet.
  • Posts: 14,840
    A former flame is a good concept, but should have been done with better casting and a better written part.

    Hopefully Madeleine works better as a former flame than as the love internet.

    That's the issue with Paris: she's meant to have been significant and in the end her backstory is just an excuse for Bond to bed her faster.
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 7,981
    Ludovico wrote: »
    A former flame is a good concept, but should have been done with better casting and a better written part.

    Hopefully Madeleine works better as a former flame than as the love internet.

    That's the issue with Paris: she's meant to have been significant and in the end her backstory is just an excuse for Bond to bed her faster.

    it doesn't fit the character. Bond closes the book on anything in the past.
    Sex with his ex for Queen and Country? Now there's an Austin Powers title if I ever saw one. And how many vodka's does he need to drink to bed her again?
    I'm sorry, but it makes Bond look weak as can be. It's just not Bond. He wouldn't do that at all.
  • edited February 2020 Posts: 1,641
    "DAD is comic book fluff"

    What was the name of the guy who wrote the 500 page Bond bible.....he basically said LALD "plays like a DC comic book"

    I think AVTAK was ahead of its time , maybe people wouldve been more familiar with it had it been released in 1995 when computers really started to take off ?
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,025
    Ludovico wrote: »
    A former flame is a good concept, but should have been done with better casting and a better written part.

    Hopefully Madeleine works better as a former flame than as the love internet.

    That's the issue with Paris: she's meant to have been significant and in the end her backstory is just an excuse for Bond to bed her faster.

    it doesn't fit the character. Bond closes the book on anything in the past.
    Sex with his ex for Queen and Country? Now there's an Austin Powers title if I ever saw one. And how many vodka's does he need to drink to bed her again?
    I'm sorry, but it makes Bond look weak as can be. It's just not Bond. He wouldn't do that at all.

    To be fair, Fleming’s Bond constantly gets smitten with a new girl, and at the very least we learn that things got serious with Tiffany Case before it fell apart. So I don’t think Bond developing feelings is beyond the pale, and him pretty much abandoning her once he realized he was getting too attached fits in with a guy who when last got close to someone died.
  • edited February 2020 Posts: 2,896
    That's true. The problem is that Paris is acted and written in such a way that you can't understand why Bond fell for her. Fleming wisely decided against bringing back old Bond girls; he even had some fun with the idea in Goldfinger, when Bond thinks he's dead and en route to heaven:
    There must be a whole lot of them, going up together. Would Tilly be on the same trip? Bond squirmed with embarrassment. How would he introduce her to the others, to Vesper for instance? And when it came to the point, which would he like the best? But perhaps it would be a big place with countries and towns. There was probably no more reason why he should run into one of his former girl friends here than there had been on earth.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,025
    His infatuation with Tilly is so funny. Nothing happened between them by that point, but Bond feels he’d have to explain her to Vesper like it’s something serious
  • GoldenGunGoldenGun Per ora e per il momento che verrà
    Posts: 6,791
    I love Connery's wobbly gunbarrel. The man actually looks like he could surprise someone, so do George and Timmy. I'd say those are the best gunbarrels.
  • OctopussyOctopussy Piz Gloria, Schilthorn, Switzerland.
    Posts: 1,081
    Revelator wrote: »
    That's true. The problem is that Paris is acted and written in such a way that you can't understand why Bond fell for her. Fleming wisely decided against bringing back old Bond girls; he even had some fun with the idea in Goldfinger, when Bond thinks he's dead and en route to heaven:
    There must be a whole lot of them, going up together. Would Tilly be on the same trip? Bond squirmed with embarrassment. How would he introduce her to the others, to Vesper for instance? And when it came to the point, which would he like the best? But perhaps it would be a big place with countries and towns. There was probably no more reason why he should run into one of his former girl friends here than there had been on earth.

    +1
  • Daniel316Daniel316 United States
    Posts: 210
    Add a +2 to that
Sign In or Register to comment.