Would you rather be a sidekick OR the main villain of the next Bond adventure?

1495052545597

Comments

  • Posts: 1,708
    SIS_HQ wrote: »
    Well, DAF is even Moore's personal favorite:

    https://screenrant.com/roger-moore-favorite-bond-movie-diamonds-forever/

    He'd stated that in some interviews as well.

    Well, all I can say is that even a Saint has flaws...

    Anyway, DAF for me is too much of a sloppy film, with moonbuggy wheels randomly running through the screen and that uttery stupid alleyway changing-of-sides as signs that they just weren't paying attention. SP was made properly. Yes, the story has (too many) flaws, but at least the production itself was sound enough. So I'd rather watch SP.


    on the previous one, after a long deliberation, I think I'll go for the yacht. IRRC it was quite an impressive ship, and though I love Switserland, and the view must be amazing I'm not much of an avid skiier.

    I was there when the Mustang/Alley shots were filmed. Just for the record, the Mustang entering the alley was shot at Universal Studios after the Mustang exiting the alley was shot in Vegas. The stunt driver on the Universal shoot could not keep the car up on the same side as the driver in Vegas so he had to drive it through on the opposite side. Not sloppy, it was unavoidable.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 5,985
    delfloria wrote: »
    SIS_HQ wrote: »
    Well, DAF is even Moore's personal favorite:

    https://screenrant.com/roger-moore-favorite-bond-movie-diamonds-forever/

    He'd stated that in some interviews as well.

    Well, all I can say is that even a Saint has flaws...

    Anyway, DAF for me is too much of a sloppy film, with moonbuggy wheels randomly running through the screen and that uttery stupid alleyway changing-of-sides as signs that they just weren't paying attention. SP was made properly. Yes, the story has (too many) flaws, but at least the production itself was sound enough. So I'd rather watch SP.


    on the previous one, after a long deliberation, I think I'll go for the yacht. IRRC it was quite an impressive ship, and though I love Switserland, and the view must be amazing I'm not much of an avid skiier.

    I was there when the Mustang/Alley shots were filmed. Just for the record, the Mustang entering the alley was shot at Universal Studios after the Mustang exiting the alley was shot in Vegas. The stunt driver on the Universal shoot could not keep the car up on the same side as the driver in Vegas so he had to drive it through on the opposite side. Not sloppy, it was unavoidable.

    Interesting, thanks. And this answers my question of what was filmed at Universal.
  • thedovethedove hiding in the Greek underworld
    Posts: 4,989
    Good stuff! I am not sure about the alley scene, I believe in the DVD behind the scenes info they mentioned that the stunt went off beautifully, but the crowd was standing on the corner and it didn't look right. So they re-shot it and the driver didn't realize that he was doing it the wrong way until Hamilton was looking over the new take. He quickly decided to do insert shots of Connery and St. John and to make it appear better as a re-shot wasn't going to be possible again. I would say it was a sloppy way of fixing and for the error in the first place.

    Ok on to another lets pit Roger against Pierce. Roger had a strong debut, and then took a mis-step with TMWTGG. Many find it to be lacklustre, to play against Roger's strengths and to be a rushed film.

    In Pierce's case I was going to use DAD but I think everyone would just pile on and call it a terrible film, so lets use TWINE instead. Many find it to be a soap opera drama. The film is often cited as bungling a female villain and Christmas Jones also gets some critics going.

    Would you rather watch Roger in TMWTGG OR Pierce in TWINE?
  • CharmianBondCharmianBond Pett Bottom, Kent
    edited October 2023 Posts: 535
    I just watched the interrogation scene with Andrea for a thing and it was tough to get through, Moore feels so wrong doing that kind of acting. It's Brosnan all the way for me, the campiness of the 'what's the point of living if you can feel alive' line reading and the pain face is all part of the charm.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,548
    Roger over Pierce any day, any film. He was naturally more likeable/charming…

    TMWTGG was a weaker effort, and Moore wasn’t built to slap anyone around, much less Maud Adams, but outside of that scene (and placing Goodnight in the closet), I enjoyed what Moore brought to the film… One of my favourite scenes is when Scaramanga sits beside Bond in the arena, while Bond is nattering away, but is trying to find the Solex….

    In short order he realizes it’s Scaramanga beside him, and-

    Bond goes for his gun, but-

    Nic Nac has him covered from behind.

    Moore was really enjoyable in this scene, and, over all, was still quite good in the film…

    As for TWINE, I personally believe that Brosnan’s strengths aren’t with layered drama— and for this film to work, it needed someone who could present in these “emotional” scenes. But I didn’t believe for one second Brosnan was falling in love. Not once did I believe he was betrayed, and hurt by the betrayal. And I hated the delivery of “I never miss”….

    In my eyes, Brosnan was at his best in TND. Light and whimsical, he was fun to watch (until the climax, which is more to do with direction than it was anything to do with Pierce).
  • TMWTGG.

    Moore is not The Saint here.
  • Posts: 12,274
    Definitely TMWTGG. TWINE has become one of my least favorite Bond films easily. I liked it quite a bit when I was a boy, but I find much of it a drag now.
  • edited October 2023 Posts: 2,954
    Moore in TMWTGG. Brosnan's performance in TWINE is, in my opinion, the worst Bond portrayal of the entire series. Some of it is outright embarrassing. Much of it comes down to the direction, but I suspect an issue with Brosnan is that he's not naturally capable of portraying more subtle moments/emotions as an actor, especially when you compare him to Connery, Moore, Dalton, and particularly Craig. His first two Bond films featured some interesting, more personal moments, but I get the feeling much of it came down to better direction (ie. if you rewatch the beach scene in GE, or the hotel meeting with Paris in TND you can tell he's not doing much as an actor, and it's the context/what he's being told to do that does the heavy lifting).

    I think it's mostly the writing that lets down Moore in TMWTGG. Bond just comes off as a dick during some key moments. There is some great stuff in there though - Bond holding Lazar at gunpoint, the 'I kill for Queen and Country' discussion with Scaramanga. I also think that despite it not being the best material for Moore, he's perfectly capable of handling it. I'd say he's the better actor between the two, and it's certainly the better performance when compared to TWINE.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited October 2023 Posts: 14,987
    007HallY wrote: »
    Moore in TMWTGG. Brosnan's performance in TWINE is, in my opinion, the worst Bond portrayal of the entire series. Some of it is outright embarrassing. Much of it comes down to the direction, but I suspect an issue with Brosnan is that he's not naturally capable of portraying more subtle moments/emotions as an actor, especially when you compare him to Connery, Moore, Dalton, and particularly Craig. His first two Bond films featured some interesting, more personal moments, but I get the feeling much of it came down to better direction (ie. if you rewatch the beach scene in GE, or the hotel meeting with Paris in TND you can tell he's not doing much as an actor, and it's the context/what he's being told to do that does the heavy lifting).

    I think it's mostly the writing that lets down Moore in TMWTGG. Bond just comes off as a dick during some key moments. There is some great stuff in there though - Bond holding Lazar at gunpoint, the 'I kill for Queen and Country' discussion with Scaramanga. I also think that despite it not being the best material for Moore, he's perfectly capable of handling it. I'd say he's the better actor between the two, and it's certainly the better performance when compared to TWINE.

    Yes I think that post absolutely nails it. TWINE is written okay from a story point of view but Brosnan isn't really up to what it asks of him (although remains an effective lead for the movie), whereas TMWTGG is written badly and makes Bond seem the most unpleasant he's ever been onscreen, but Moore is more than up for the job and still makes him (mostly) likeable. Both films are the work of below par Bond directors, if you ask me.

    Also, regarding the writing, the two are chalk and cheese when it comes to the dialogue. GG is peppered with memorable and genuinely witty lines, whereas TWINE is utterly artless. I recently actually watched some of Golden Gun (which I tend to regard as one of the lesser Bond films) and put on TWINE at the opening sequence and you can actually see the skill and wit drain away before your eyes. Gone are the witty lines, sparkling performances and beautiful sets (and GG doesn't even have the best 007 sets): you're plonked in Spain in a dreary little office any of us could be working in tomorrow with Brosnan coming out with half-baked innuendoes about rounded figures. The contrast is shocking.
  • Posts: 2,954
    mtm wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    Moore in TMWTGG. Brosnan's performance in TWINE is, in my opinion, the worst Bond portrayal of the entire series. Some of it is outright embarrassing. Much of it comes down to the direction, but I suspect an issue with Brosnan is that he's not naturally capable of portraying more subtle moments/emotions as an actor, especially when you compare him to Connery, Moore, Dalton, and particularly Craig. His first two Bond films featured some interesting, more personal moments, but I get the feeling much of it came down to better direction (ie. if you rewatch the beach scene in GE, or the hotel meeting with Paris in TND you can tell he's not doing much as an actor, and it's the context/what he's being told to do that does the heavy lifting).

    I think it's mostly the writing that lets down Moore in TMWTGG. Bond just comes off as a dick during some key moments. There is some great stuff in there though - Bond holding Lazar at gunpoint, the 'I kill for Queen and Country' discussion with Scaramanga. I also think that despite it not being the best material for Moore, he's perfectly capable of handling it. I'd say he's the better actor between the two, and it's certainly the better performance when compared to TWINE.

    Yes I think that post absolutely nails it. TWINE is written okay from a story point of view but Brosnan isn't really up to what it asks of him (although remains an effective lead for the movie), whereas TMWTGG is written badly and makes Bond seem the most unpleasant he's ever been onscreen, but Moore is more than up for the job and still makes him (mostly) likeable. Both films are the work of below par Bond directors, if you ask me.

    Also, regarding the writing, the two are chalk and cheese when it comes to the dialogue. GG is peppered with memorable and genuinely witty lines, whereas TWINE is utterly artless. I recently actually watched some of Golden Gun (which I tend to regard as one of the lesser Bond films) and put on TWINE at the opening sequence and you can actually see the skill and wit drain away before your eyes. Gone are the witty lines, sparkling performances and beautiful sets (and GG doesn't even have the best 007 sets): you're plonked in Spain in a dreary little office any of us could be working in tomorrow with Brosnan coming out with half-baked innuendoes about rounded figures. The contrast is shocking.

    Good points. TWINE is an irritating Bond film. It had so much potential, and indeed a lot of ideas within it crop up again in SF. The problem is almost everything about it is wrong - the script, the casting of Carlyle and Richards, the direction, the way Brosnan delivers lines or facial expressions in increasingly strange, soap opera type ways throughout the film... As you said it even looks dreary at certain points.
  • talos7talos7 New Orleans
    Posts: 7,983
    Hands down TWINE, it’s my favorite Brosnan film. I have issues with some aspects, but consider it classic Bond and an early template for SF
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    edited October 2023 Posts: 3,392
    Not a fan of both, but I can see what Brosnan and the filmmakers are trying to do with TWINE (amid script and directing issues), and at least its trying to be a decent Bond film, it's like FYEO, for me, while not perfect or not great, are decent at least.

    TMWTGG is my least favorite Bond film of them all, and there are many things gone wrong in that film: Mary Goodnight's actions, JW Pepper returning for no reason other than to share his racist views, Lieutenant Hip being a dumb ally, Bond's treatment of women, obvious and cringeworthy sexual puns like Phuyuck and whatever there is in the Bottom's Up Club, Bond doing stupid things like that third nipple gadget (well, does it cover him at all?), slide whistle, out of place cartoonish moments, Kung Fu parodies, Bad cinematography, weakest score by Barry, one of the weakest songs in the Franchise by Lulu, and I could get on and on.
    It's a film that's simply didn't aged well.
    All of what's in TMWTGG was just too much and out of place.

    Not even Moore or Christopher Lee could've saved that film (Scaramanga's intention was convoluted and not clear).

    It's not until MR where Moore hits his stride for me.

    TWINE, for all of its flaws, at least there's some decency in it, while there's Christmas Jones (which I'll admit is one of the film's major flaws), but my issues with TWINE is more lesser than with TMWTGG.
  • 007HallY wrote: »
    Moore in TMWTGG. Brosnan's performance in TWINE is, in my opinion, the worst Bond portrayal of the entire series.

    I’d make that point about Moore in TMWTGG myself purely based on how unlikable he is. He also tries so hard to replicate those elements that Connery had mastered effortlessly that I find myself wishing I was watching Connery in the film instead of Moore. Brosnan in TWINE by comparison is no where near as bad imo.
  • SIS_HQSIS_HQ At the Vauxhall Headquarters
    edited October 2023 Posts: 3,392
    007HallY wrote: »
    Moore in TMWTGG. Brosnan's performance in TWINE is, in my opinion, the worst Bond portrayal of the entire series.

    I’d make that point about Moore in TMWTGG myself purely based on how unlikable he is. He also tries so hard to replicate those elements that Connery had mastered effortlessly that I find myself wishing I was watching Connery in the film instead of Moore. Brosnan in TWINE by comparison is no where near as bad imo.

    Bond was badly played in it.

    Not even I could imagine Connery doing those Kung Fu scenes with him jumping off the wall to escape the Karate school and confidently watching the two school girls fight those Martial Artists, nor I could imagine him putting a woman inside a closet.

    For me, this is the Bond of LALD just leveled up, you have him from tricking a woman to have sex by the use of fake Tarot Cards, seeing him threatening Rosie Carver with a gun and hurting her by putting the cigar's light upon her arm before it, to burning a snake using a spray can, him touching his neckties (with that arrogant face) while JW Pepper was scolding him after the boat chase.

    Just too arrogant.
  • TMWTGG is LALD with less action.

  • Posts: 2,954
    007HallY wrote: »
    Moore in TMWTGG. Brosnan's performance in TWINE is, in my opinion, the worst Bond portrayal of the entire series.

    I’d make that point about Moore in TMWTGG myself purely based on how unlikable he is. He also tries so hard to replicate those elements that Connery had mastered effortlessly that I find myself wishing I was watching Connery in the film instead of Moore. Brosnan in TWINE by comparison is no where near as bad imo.

    To each their own. I do think that while the script doesn't do Moore any favours he plays it well enough. It's just not the right material for him. Honestly, I'm not sure if even Connery could have gotten away with some of the stuff in that film.

    Brosnan has some badly written lines in TWINE, but things like his weird, exaggerated 'huh?' during his scene with Renard, the bizarre line deliveries during his confrontation with Elektra are all issues with his performance. Like I said it becomes embarrassing to watch for me at certain points.
  • Posts: 6,825
    Roger in TMWTGG all day long!
    I couldn't take much more of Brossa talking about his "shouuuuuuuuulder!"
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited October 2023 Posts: 14,987
    007HallY wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    Moore in TMWTGG. Brosnan's performance in TWINE is, in my opinion, the worst Bond portrayal of the entire series. Some of it is outright embarrassing. Much of it comes down to the direction, but I suspect an issue with Brosnan is that he's not naturally capable of portraying more subtle moments/emotions as an actor, especially when you compare him to Connery, Moore, Dalton, and particularly Craig. His first two Bond films featured some interesting, more personal moments, but I get the feeling much of it came down to better direction (ie. if you rewatch the beach scene in GE, or the hotel meeting with Paris in TND you can tell he's not doing much as an actor, and it's the context/what he's being told to do that does the heavy lifting).

    I think it's mostly the writing that lets down Moore in TMWTGG. Bond just comes off as a dick during some key moments. There is some great stuff in there though - Bond holding Lazar at gunpoint, the 'I kill for Queen and Country' discussion with Scaramanga. I also think that despite it not being the best material for Moore, he's perfectly capable of handling it. I'd say he's the better actor between the two, and it's certainly the better performance when compared to TWINE.

    Yes I think that post absolutely nails it. TWINE is written okay from a story point of view but Brosnan isn't really up to what it asks of him (although remains an effective lead for the movie), whereas TMWTGG is written badly and makes Bond seem the most unpleasant he's ever been onscreen, but Moore is more than up for the job and still makes him (mostly) likeable. Both films are the work of below par Bond directors, if you ask me.

    Also, regarding the writing, the two are chalk and cheese when it comes to the dialogue. GG is peppered with memorable and genuinely witty lines, whereas TWINE is utterly artless. I recently actually watched some of Golden Gun (which I tend to regard as one of the lesser Bond films) and put on TWINE at the opening sequence and you can actually see the skill and wit drain away before your eyes. Gone are the witty lines, sparkling performances and beautiful sets (and GG doesn't even have the best 007 sets): you're plonked in Spain in a dreary little office any of us could be working in tomorrow with Brosnan coming out with half-baked innuendoes about rounded figures. The contrast is shocking.

    Good points. TWINE is an irritating Bond film. It had so much potential, and indeed a lot of ideas within it crop up again in SF. The problem is almost everything about it is wrong - the script, the casting of Carlyle and Richards, the direction, the way Brosnan delivers lines or facial expressions in increasingly strange, soap opera type ways throughout the film... As you said it even looks dreary at certain points.

    I think it looks and sounds dreary most of the way through, and features, in the ski chase, possibly the dullest action scene in the whole series. But, yes, I do like the story and the ideas it has- it's bursting with ideas which were new and innovative for the series, and yet which fitted very well in a Bond film. It's just the execution is almost entirely flat. It's one of the few Bond films I'd describe as brown, too. I think of the colours in it, and where TND is red and metallic, TWINE is brown.
    SIS_HQ wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    Moore in TMWTGG. Brosnan's performance in TWINE is, in my opinion, the worst Bond portrayal of the entire series.

    I’d make that point about Moore in TMWTGG myself purely based on how unlikable he is. He also tries so hard to replicate those elements that Connery had mastered effortlessly that I find myself wishing I was watching Connery in the film instead of Moore. Brosnan in TWINE by comparison is no where near as bad imo.

    Bond was badly played in it.

    Not even I could imagine Connery doing those Kung Fu scenes with him jumping off the wall to escape the Karate school and confidently watching the two school girls fight those Martial Artists, nor I could imagine him putting a woman inside a closet.

    For me, this is the Bond of LALD just leveled up, you have him from tricking a woman to have sex by the use of fake Tarot Cards, seeing him threatening Rosie Carver with a gun and hurting her by putting the cigar's light upon her arm before it, to burning a snake using a spray can, him touching his neckties (with that arrogant face) while JW Pepper was scolding him after the boat chase.

    Just too arrogant.

    That's all the writing (and direction); it's not the actor's fault.
    I do think that Guy Hamilton had gone off the rails by this point, providing us with the most sexist Bond film halfway into the 70s- not really progress. Once he had gone, Moore was able to soften his portrayal into something which suited him much better.
  • NielsDKNielsDK Denmark
    Posts: 3
    Not only is Twine a better film than The man with the golden gun, but its also easily Brosnans best performance as Bond.
  • DwayneDwayne New York City
    Posts: 2,630
    While not a great Bond film by any means, TWINE is quite enjoyable and is at-least partially successful at what it sets out to do. TMWTGG, on the other hand, had potential, but was poorly made IMO.
  • R1s1ngs0nR1s1ngs0n France
    Posts: 2,020
    Given that Brosnan is by far my least favorite Bond, it's not even a contest.
  • Posts: 6,677
    Can’t choose…love both so much. But TMWTGG added more iconography to the series. But that TWINE intro in Bilbao is a killer. Can’t choose, really.
  • slide_99slide_99 USA
    edited October 2023 Posts: 652
    Two of my favorite Bond performances. I love Moore's colorful and aggressive performance in TMWTGG, it's very much how someone who's being targeted (or thinks he's being targeted) by an enemy assassin would behave. On the other hand, I also love how Brosnan balances confidence and world-weariness in TWINE.

    If we were going by movies, I'd go with TMWTGG, but since it's Moore vs Brosnan, I'd go with Brosnan, but just barely.
  • Posts: 15,826
    TMWTGG
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited October 2023 Posts: 5,985
    Ugh, I kind of hate both but I hate TMWTGG less. @Univex, I hear you about about the iconography but I think TMWTGG wins that one over TWINE, hands down (the fun house, the sunken ship, etc.).
  • PrinceKamalKhanPrinceKamalKhan Monsoon Palace, Udaipur
    Posts: 3,262
    Easily Sir Rog in TMWTGG. Moore gives a much more believable performance than Brosnan and the 1974 Bond film is far less pretentious than the schizoid combo of OHMSS and AVTAK known as TWINE.
  • Posts: 1,708
    thedove wrote: »
    Good stuff! I am not sure about the alley scene, I believe in the DVD behind the scenes info they mentioned that the stunt went off beautifully, but the crowd was standing on the corner and it didn't look right. So they re-shot it and the driver didn't realize that he was doing it the wrong way until Hamilton was looking over the new take. He quickly decided to do insert shots of Connery and St. John and to make it appear better as a re-shot wasn't going to be possible again. I would say it was a sloppy way of fixing and for the error in the first place.

    Ok on to another lets pit Roger against Pierce. Roger had a strong debut, and then took a mis-step with TMWTGG. Many find it to be lacklustre, to play against Roger's strengths and to be a rushed film.

    In Pierce's case I was going to use DAD but I think everyone would just pile on and call it a terrible film, so lets use TWINE instead. Many find it to be a soap opera drama. The film is often cited as bungling a female villain and Christmas Jones also gets some critics going.

    Would you rather watch Roger in TMWTGG OR Pierce in TWINE?

    Before the above comment gets lost in the thread, all I can say is that I was there and I have reservations about what was said on the DVD extras.
  • BennyBenny In the shadowsAdministrator, Moderator
    Posts: 14,884
    Whilst both have there issues, my vote easily goes to TMWTGG.
    TWINE has a few good scenes, but on the whole is (imo) the worst film of the series.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 14,987
    delfloria wrote: »
    thedove wrote: »
    Good stuff! I am not sure about the alley scene, I believe in the DVD behind the scenes info they mentioned that the stunt went off beautifully, but the crowd was standing on the corner and it didn't look right. So they re-shot it and the driver didn't realize that he was doing it the wrong way until Hamilton was looking over the new take. He quickly decided to do insert shots of Connery and St. John and to make it appear better as a re-shot wasn't going to be possible again. I would say it was a sloppy way of fixing and for the error in the first place.

    Ok on to another lets pit Roger against Pierce. Roger had a strong debut, and then took a mis-step with TMWTGG. Many find it to be lacklustre, to play against Roger's strengths and to be a rushed film.

    In Pierce's case I was going to use DAD but I think everyone would just pile on and call it a terrible film, so lets use TWINE instead. Many find it to be a soap opera drama. The film is often cited as bungling a female villain and Christmas Jones also gets some critics going.

    Would you rather watch Roger in TMWTGG OR Pierce in TWINE?

    Before the above comment gets lost in the thread, all I can say is that I was there and I have reservations about what was said on the DVD extras.

    If they did the alley shot afterwards to match the Vegas exit, did they build the alley and brick ‘ramp’ for the driver?
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,121
    Michael G Wilson once said that EON starts making a FRWL, then they end up with another TB. I don’t think EON focuses too much on making a true classic, just something that’s enjoyable. TWINE is different in that regard. It’s like they wanted to change their formula, but no one could agree, on various things. It feels like EON wanted a true classic, but their old formula kept leaking in, with some rare bad casting. Meanwhile, with TMWTGG, the campy cynicism of Guy Hamilton and Tom Mankiewicz got too much to bare at times. They had not much time to plan things, so they fully leaned into their Bond trademarks. Dumb American cops and ladies, in particular. A main reason that the series nearly ended. However, the realism of Scaramanga and his plot give TMWTGG a narrow edge for me. Both of these movies were early Bond experiences for me, but TMWTGG has things that are real problems in the world now, almost 50 years later. TWINE in retrospect, has started a lot of the problems that DC’s era, that need to end in the next era. Namely family soap opera dramas.
Sign In or Register to comment.