›

Last Bond Movie You Watched

1…331332333334335337»

Comments

  • LeighBurneLeighBurne
    Posts: 128
    Octopussy. It’s not exactly top-tier 007, and it’s hurt further by the fact the pre-titles (one of the best in the series?) is miles better than anything else about it, but as with almost any oldschool Bond movie it’s still a thoroughly entertaining couple of hours.

    Also always quite liked how this starts out as your standard globetrotting Bond feature of the period before morphing into a genuine Cold War thriller in its final act.
  • MSL49MSL49 Finland
    Posts: 809
    Agreed OP has lot of good in it.
  • DEKE_RIVERSDEKE_RIVERS
    edited November 6 Posts: 2,552
    talos7 wrote: »
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    MSL49 wrote: »
    Mathis1 wrote: »
    GoldenGun wrote: »
    DAD was also my Bond film in theaters and I also have a soft spot for it. Although I didn't quite like it back in the day, I have come to like it, partly also for nostalgic reasons.

    Now there's a lot to say about its misfires, but I do think there some genuinely good moments in it as well: the pts, the title sequence, the Hong Kong hotel scene, the Cuba scenes, Raoul, the sword fight, Miranda Frost, the ice palace design and the car chase.

    I remember going to see it in my usual cinema, The Savoy, and when the curtains opened , the screen appearing bigger than usual, and someone seated behind me whispering "now we're talking!"
    As for the film, I exited so utterly depressed, thinking, is this honestly what we are going to expect from future Bond movies. At that time there was no sign of Brossa being given the boot and he looked like he could equal Moore and Connerys output! Thank God, Babs and Wilson decided to reboot!

    They get the CR rights its the one and only reason why they didnt continue with Brosnan.

    Think there was more to it than that!

    No doubt there was more to it, but securing the rights to CR was pivotal; had they not, it’s is highly likely we would have gone another, probably more grounded, Brosnan film. With the right script, re-teaming John McTiernan and Pierce could have been interesting.

    They already had the rights before making DAD. They hadn't planned to use them at first, but they changed their minds.
  • 007HallY007HallY
    Posts: 6,377
    It’s definitely an interesting ‘what if’. In practice I don’t know what route they would have gone down if they didn’t have CR. I suppose you could argue they’d have cast a new Bond anyway (I think it was a case of things needing to change).
  • MSL49MSL49 Finland
    Posts: 809
    007HallY wrote: »
    It’s definitely an interesting ‘what if’. In practice I don’t know what route they would have gone down if they didn’t have CR. I suppose you could argue they’d have cast a new Bond anyway (I think it was a case of things needing to change).

    Would that Bond have been Craig?
  • 007HallY007HallY
    edited November 7 Posts: 6,377
    MSL49 wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    It’s definitely an interesting ‘what if’. In practice I don’t know what route they would have gone down if they didn’t have CR. I suppose you could argue they’d have cast a new Bond anyway (I think it was a case of things needing to change).

    Would that Bond have been Craig?

    Potentially, as they supposedly spotted Craig as early as 1998. They would still have made DAD and Bourne would still have come around after, prompting the much needed change in direction. Brosnan's contract would still have needed renegotiating. I suppose you could argue CR being a reboot was the final straw in the decision to recast, but it's possible they'd have wanted a clean slate anyway after a point, and there's no reason they wouldn't have rebooted the franchise with a new Bond (obviously Batman Begins/stories of its development would still exist, assuming that pushed the studio and EON to go ahead with that direction for Bond).

    Honestly, I suspect if they hadn't had CR, we'd have gotten a spin on the first half of the film anyway, and from what I understand it's what they started with when this film was being developed as a fifth Brosnan installment (ie. the Madagascar chase, possibly a plane or something being bombed, and perhaps even the opening with Bond getting his 00 status if they'd recast with Craig).
  • Mathis1Mathis1
    Posts: 8,635
    FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE (1963)
    I relented, after upgrading from video, to dvd, to blu-ray, I decided to purchase a 4k of one of Connerys. I didnt want to fork out for the set, so I picked my favourite of his! It does look great, but not sure its a huge step up from the blu-ray! Anyway, still a cracking Bond film, full of intrigue, wonderful characters, menacing villains, great locations, Sean on tip top form, and thrilling action. Standout is Robert Shaws Donald 'Red' Grant, magnificent nemesis, silent throughout most of it, lurking in the background, when he finally does talk, impersonating a contact,the tension rattles up, concluding with a bruising fight sequence with Bond! Great viewing as always!
  • MSL49MSL49 Finland
    Posts: 809
    007HallY wrote: »
    MSL49 wrote: »
    007HallY wrote: »
    It’s definitely an interesting ‘what if’. In practice I don’t know what route they would have gone down if they didn’t have CR. I suppose you could argue they’d have cast a new Bond anyway (I think it was a case of things needing to change).

    Would that Bond have been Craig?

    Potentially, as they supposedly spotted Craig as early as 1998. They would still have made DAD and Bourne would still have come around after, prompting the much needed change in direction. Brosnan's contract would still have needed renegotiating. I suppose you could argue CR being a reboot was the final straw in the decision to recast, but it's possible they'd have wanted a clean slate anyway after a point, and there's no reason they wouldn't have rebooted the franchise with a new Bond (obviously Batman Begins/stories of its development would still exist, assuming that pushed the studio and EON to go ahead with that direction for Bond).

    Honestly, I suspect if they hadn't had CR, we'd have gotten a spin on the first half of the film anyway, and from what I understand it's what they started with when this film was being developed as a fifth Brosnan installment (ie. the Madagascar chase, possibly a plane or something being bombed, and perhaps even the opening with Bond getting his 00 status if they'd recast with Craig).

    Chose Craig made sense his career was at the right spot but many didnt like his looks.
Sign In or Register to comment.