Controversial opinions about Bond films

1731732733734735737»

Comments

  • DaltonforyouDaltonforyou The Daltonator
    Posts: 952
    I remember hearing on Zaritsky's Bond experience how he believes that the nanobots concept was originally more of an Virus type thing but that changed with the pandemic and they conducted adr. Not sure if I believe that, but it's an interesting theory.

    Perhaps could explain why Safin and his plan seem so poorly thought out. If he's just some nihilistic bloke why does he care about buyer ships?
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe Edward Berger for Bond 27
    Posts: 9,404
    John Glen is underrated, and 1983 to 1987 was overall stronger than 1962 to 1965. the mid 80's was the peak for cinematic Bond, where they had a blend of intrigue, mystery, romance, danger, action and humour on a huge scale.
  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing Long Neck Ice Cold Beer Never Broke My Heart
    Posts: 4,865
    John Glen is underrated, and 1983 to 1987 was overall stronger than 1962 to 1965. the mid 80's was the peak for cinematic Bond, where they had a blend of intrigue, mystery, romance, danger, action and humour on a huge scale.

    83 and 87 yes. The only intrigue and danger from AVTAK was how Bond was able to make a quice
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe Edward Berger for Bond 27
    Posts: 9,404
    John Glen is underrated, and 1983 to 1987 was overall stronger than 1962 to 1965. the mid 80's was the peak for cinematic Bond, where they had a blend of intrigue, mystery, romance, danger, action and humour on a huge scale.

    83 and 87 yes. The only intrigue and danger from AVTAK was how Bond was able to make a quice

    1985 is the weak link, but not weak enough to bring down the whole era.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    Posts: 9,430
    Just for the record, I find 83 just as weak a link as 85. 81 and 87 are ok John Glen films, the others...not so.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe Edward Berger for Bond 27
    Posts: 9,404
    j_w_pepper wrote: »
    Just for the record, I find 83 just as weak a link as 85. 81 and 87 are ok John Glen films, the others...not so.

    What's wrong with Octopussy?
  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing Long Neck Ice Cold Beer Never Broke My Heart
    Posts: 4,865
    OP and TLD are great Bond films. LTK is starting to really grow on me. The less said about FYEO the better
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou, but I now hear a new dog barkin'
    Posts: 9,430
    @Mendes4Lyfe

    Stupid, convoluted story. Iron curtain fantasy on "Little Johnny" level, plot holes and continuity problems (I leave those out here) galore. A fair bit of what would today be considered racism (I cut them some slack for this, given it was over 40 years ago, and the "keep you in curry" line is at least funny). The circus story with the train going directly from East Germany to a U.S. air base in West Germany, without being thoroughly checked by either side, is preposterous, as is the notion of the MI6 boss accompanying an agent to Checkpoint Charlie, which was heavily observed by the Stasi (in fact, there is an extensive report by them about the filming, identifying the actors). Tarzan yell. Telling the tiger to sit. Gorilla costume. Clown costume. Octopussy's girl troupe. Balloon scene. It's definitely the silliest of the Bond movies. And silly equals funny only to a very limited extent.

    The PTS is pretty good, followed by a mediocre theme song. And from then on, it keeps going down the drain, apart from a few good lines ("No, ma'am, I'm with the economy tour"). I'm always wondering if I prefer AVTAK in reality, and maybe I do. At least OP is somewhere down there at the bottom of my rewatch scale, along with TWINE and DAD

    It is no surprise that when NSNA came out five months after OP, most of the reviews I read at the time considered NSNA far better (at least here in Germany). I definitely still do.
  • Posts: 2,736
    "Stupid and convoluted" can be applied to any number of Bond plots when held under scrutiny. Even at their best, these aren't films that are going to be featured on "Lessons from the Screenplay" anytime soon.

    If anything, NSNA makes Octopussy look like Citizen Kane in comparison. Even though McClory had an ace in the hole with Connery as Bond - it still wasn't enough to give EON the fight he was hoping for. It reeks of a film made out of desperation - a desire to one up Cubby Broccoli and EON productions. It failed in that regard since Octopussy beat it at the box office. But even now it's a strange movie where the performances come across as hammey at times, it has an awful score, and the changes they make from Thunderball often come across as inferior. It's especially disappointing when considering that McClory and Co had a unique opportunity to do something different from EON's series but no - they opted to make a worse version of a film that was nearly 20 years old at that point.
Sign In or Register to comment.