It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Really? DAD's considered one of the worst ones amongst casual fans in my experience! I've heard people refer to it as 'nobody's favourite Bond film'! CR's the one I've found more people remember fondly, and indeed remember more readily.
As for TLD and GE, I'd say those are two noticeably different Bond adventures. But they are similar in the sense that they're Bond films which reinterpret the character for their respective time/eras. Ultimately I'd rather for Bond 26 they go their own route and try to forge this film's own identity within the scope of Bond films. Not try to emulate fully what's come before.
I'd say the same if they went into the film wanting to simply retell a previous Bond adventure in general, agreed. If they find themselves drawn to certain ideas for their story that have been hinted at in previous films and want to expand on them, or use them as a foundation, that's another thing I'd say. I'm not sure they can avoid the latter as it comes with the territory of writing a Bond adventure.
It's not really revisionism. Is it new saying that DAD has some great ideas but didn't execute its story well?
I couldn't agree more :-bd
To be fair it's quite an odd Bond film in many ways, so 'traditional' isn't the immediate word I'd use. How much fun one has with it is debatable (I actually really enjoy parts of it for what it's worth, and at other times I find myself rolling my eyes). I think it's definitely on the more 'nowhere as bad as you remember it' side whenever I've gone back and rewatched it, even with its strange early 2000s slow motion and sped up shots, bizarrely flat looking cinematography, and a fair few odd directorial decisions. It's fine, more a misfire than an abomination of a Bond movie, which is how I'd describe what I'd see as the lesser films of the franchise. As I said, 9/10 times I'd rather watch it over TB or even DAF. I actually see it as similar to many of Hamilton's efforts in many ways - good ideas, but executed in odd, somewhat campy ways, with a fair bit of disorganised filmmaking. Much like DAF or TMWTGG it's a product of its time in many ways. But at least I've never been bored with DAD.
Oh, QOS is another slight misfire in my opinion! Very interesting film though. But I completely understand what you mean, and I agree.
Sure, it's never boring. But I think they could have strengthened the story while maintaining the thrills and fun. SF managed to have its share of 'crowd cheering' and Bondian humour while giving us an interesting story. It seemed to reap the rewards.
I think it was just a case of the wrong film with the wrong actor, and at the wrong time in the series. I really don't think it deserves any hatred though. I honestly think there are worse Bond movies.
Exactly the movie isn't very good at all. And was blown out of the water by casino royale