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
While I acknowledge the fact that DN has some of the most well known and iconic moments of the series, at times it feels a mile away from FRWL. I don't know, it's been a good 4 years since I last watched it but I must admit I've never been blown away by it.
Yes we get the most famous intro in film history, Dent's cold execution and Andress legendary sequence and the tense tarantula moment, seeing Bond without gadgets living on his wits and also Joseph Wiseman's haunting title villain and of course Connery's electrifying debut.
Though outside of this and I'll probably get flamed as a Bond heretic it seems incredibly underwhelming and at times I lost interest in it, I find it hard to believe anyone would think this is the best film of the series. I've never thought it a particularly amazing film, that being said Ken Adam set design is simple but effective and the script delivers some good dialogue and getting to see it on Blu ray for the first time is indeed an experience, it looks exceptional.
I think the fact we have to endure (outside of the constant use of the JB theme and the memorable catchy songs) Monty Norman's well below substandard score, at times it sounds like some Max Steiner knock off, it certainly shows the importance of Barry and what he bought to the series and the music here just doesn't make you feel like you are watching a Bond film just some exotic detective thriller.
I know it's the first and yes I have to understand it was before the familiar traits were introduced but FRWL just is a so much a better film, this isn't to fault Young he's working with what he's got and him and Connery are giving their best but you feel that with FRWL they got into their stride and really got to show off the character proper.
I'm sorry I have to say what I see and Dr No just didn't get my blood pumping.
6.5/10
Anyway, it is a somewhere-in-the-middle-film; with few iconic moments to recommend it (I love the car scene, though, if not the car itself). The fact that I like Pierce significantly more than Roger puts it over FYEO, but behind TLD for me. Solid, but unremarkable – a microcosm of the Brosnan era in retrospect (but I’ll probably come back to that after the last two). Not many surprises in this film, though the dialogue was significantly worse than I remember - not everything has to be a pun. Time for some Connery I think. So:
1. OHMSS
2. Goldeneye
3. Live And Let Die
4. The Living Daylights
5. Tomorrow Never Dies
6. For Your Eyes Only
7. Diamonds Are Forever
8. The Man With The Golden Gun
9. Never Say Never Again
10. Octopussy
11. A View To A Kill
Dr No has never been my favourite Connery, as it is very much the establishing film, and the film with the lowest budget. It was great to watch it after seeing every other Bond in action (except DC) - including late Connery. It was like a long drink of water to a thirsty man. I have tried to give the other Bond's credit where able, but I feel like I have been watching pale tribute acts even if other actors are not really mimicking Sean (I include late Connery in that statement). This was BOND. He just owns the role immediately, and dominates the screen. his rapport with Bernard Lee is immediate, and we get a feel for who Bond is straight away. I managed to enjoy DAF this time, but these is no substituting that Sean Connery for the lean, smooth moving younger version we have here. Magnificent.
The film itself is about as I remember in its second-half - solid and enjoyable, but I enjoyed the early establishing stuff much more this time than ever before: probably because I have held off on peak Connery for so long this time. I think this also establishes in my mind two things: Connery is still my favourite Bond by a distance and, nice though I was about some of their films, I really can't see Roger (in particular) or Tim as my cinematic James Bond. Pierce - who I love - doesn't hold a candle to Connery (for me) either - more on that when I cover the last of their films though. I can't really comment on Lazenby as his film was very different and he was a one-shot - he is also similar enough physically to Connery, and in a similar enough era, for me to let it pass - and I love his film. I am surprised, but in watching Dr No the same day as Goldeneye, I am going to put it in front of that. Goldeneye is great, and probably holds a higher standard throughout the whole film, but this is the James Bond I fell in love with, and I have never loved this film more than I did at about one o' clock this morning, even if there was better to come from the series. So:
1. OHMSS
2. Dr No (which REALLY surprises me)
3. Goldeneye
4. Live And Let Die
5. The Living Daylights
6. Tomorrow Never Dies
7. For Your Eyes Only
8. Diamonds Are Forever
9. The Man With The Golden Gun
10. Never Say Never Again
11. Octopussy
12. A View To A Kill
Anyways, Dr. No is a top ten effort for me, due, to no small part, Connery's awesome magnetism. As Terence Young said, the success of Dr. No is “Connery, Connery, Connery”
I've always found TSWLM to be sort of in the middle with me. Sometimes it is really great, and then sometimes it is just halfway there, if you know what I mean. This time I was pretty impressed! It's still not my favorite Roger Moore 007, but it's also not the worst (I give that title to Moonraker). All things considered, it does have incredible location work, amazing set pieces to go along with that, a magnificent soundtrack, grand-epic action, and Roger in a really great performance.
Bondathon Current Ranking:
1. From Russia with Love
2. Live and Let Die
3. The Man with the Golden Gun
4. The Spy Who Loved Me
5. Thunderball
6. Diamonds Are Forever
7. Dr. No
8. On Her Majesty's Secret Service
9. You Only Live Twice
10. Goldfinger
Thanks, very kind. Yes looking forward to trying to explain myself on that one!
I always find myself going back and forth on this one, as to whether or not I absolutely loathed it or found it to be passable. This time it went a little bit beyond passable and into the not half bad range, which I am surprised at to tell you the truth! As has been stated by reviewers many times before, the location work and the soundtrack are easily the two biggest stand-out qualities to Moonraker, and for good reason too. The action, in my opinion, is a step down from The Spy Who Loved Me in terms of enjoyability, but nevertheless, there were some very entertaining pieces, like the pre-title sequence airplane fight, Bond vs. Chang, and Bond's tussel with the huge snake at Drax's pyramid. I still really did not like Holly Goodhead, and Hugo Drax didn't necessarily spark fire to the film either. Also, I cannot stand they way Jaws was changed from a terrifying menace to a goofy cartoon character. Anyways, all things considered, it wasn't as bad as it normally seems to be, so I was quite pleased!
Bondathon Current Ranking:
1. From Russia with Love
2. Live and Let Die
3. The Man with the Golden Gun
4. The Spy Who Loved Me
5. Thunderball
6. Diamonds Are Forever
7. Moonraker
8. Dr. No
9. On Her Majesty's Secret Service
10. You Only Live Twice
11. Goldfinger
For the first 30-40 minutes I felt like my fears were about to be confirmed; it did, indeed, feel like Miami Vice, and his exchanges with M felt forced and extremely out of character on M's part. Robert Brown cemented his position as my least favourite M, and I just thought 'let's get through this'. The turning point was where Bond finds Pam Bouvier's name on the computer then finds her in the bar. From then on it was game on: Dalton absolutely commanded the part and, more importantly, the screen; he convinced me he was a killer in a way that he hadn't in his debut. The small flaws from then on were only that his first kiss with Pam after they escaped on the boat felt rushed, as they had not established a rapport by that point, and the number of times he told Q and Pam to leave and let him work alone started to grate on me. It remains a film of its era, as Sanchez does feel like a villain from the drug films of the time, rather than TLD which feels more like a period piece. I was, however, thrilled by this film, and it one of the most beautiful in the Bond 50 set also - something not often said of the 1980s Bond films. This film was the epiphany for me on Dalton that I was hoping for with TLD, and just couldn't feel; even if I could see it to a degree. I don't regret that Dalton did not do Goldeneye - that film would not have suited him in its final form - and I am a Brosnan fan, but I am deeply sorry he didn't get 3 or 4 of these now.
Scoring this is tough, as I have never had much appreciation of this film previously, and it doesn't feel like a traditional Bond film. I expect this could change in the future, but I have to go with the enjoyment I experienced this time and, so, controversially.
1. OHMSS
2. Dr No
3. Licence To Kill
4. Goldeneye
5. Live And Let Die
6. The Living Daylights
7. Tomorrow Never Dies
8. For Your Eyes Only
9. Diamonds Are Forever
10. The Man With The Golden Gun
11. Never Say Never Again
12. Octopussy
13. A View To A Kill
The World Is Not Enough. This could get a bit long, we'll see. Anyway, my background with this film is that I saw it opening night - then a couple of further times - at the cinema. When the film was announced, three names stuck out to me: Michael Apted, Sophie Marceau, Robert Carlyle. Apted had done films like Gorky Park and Gorillas In The Mist, and Marceau was a beautiful and talented actress and not, like Teri Hatcher, one hired for being flavour of the month (I later found Denise Richards fit that category, but we'll get there). Robert Carlyle had first surfaced on my radar when he played a mentally damaged killer in the Robbie Coltrane-starring UK TV Series Cracker (*sidenote, please search out this show if you haven't seen it, it is wonderful). He had also taken a great role as Begbie in Trainspotting, yet everytime you saw him in something new, he would be totally different. Then I heard that he would be playing a character called Renard, who could not feel pain. I thought this could end up as a dramatic Bond film, with excellent drama, great performances, but with enough classic tropes to stand out. Then, when at the cinema to see the Phantom Menace, a trailer played for TWINE (and believe me that was the best thing I saw at the cinema that day!), and something was different - in a good way. I saw it a second time a few weeks later and it hit me that Brosnan just looked so much more confident in the role, and just more suited somehow. My hopes were very high.
Had I been doing this ten years ago, TWINE would have sat even higher on the list than it is likely to here. Everything about the film, with the exception of one scene and one character stood out as excellent. As time has passed, I am more inclined to see the flaws in this film; but I still see it as the best of the Brosnan era, even though I accept that is a minority view.
Viewing it this time, I still consider it a very fine Bond film, but I must attempt to address its flaws first, before I explaining why I hold it in such high esteem. Let's start with the character and scene I didn't like. I am sure it will be no surprise to anyone that Dr Christmas Jones is the character. Now, as bad as she is, and as ill-suited to the role of a nuclear scientist as this Lara Croft-by-way-of-Beverly-Hills actress is; my problem is not really with her or her fit for the role. She is no worse than Mary Goodnight or Stacey Sutton. It is more that her presence tonally confuses the film completely. I will talk further down about the relationship between James and Electra and how it is trying to evoke Bond and Tracy or (though it was not yet a film) Bond and Vesper. Whether you agree with this or not, imagine if Bond had met another girl 60 minutes from the end of Casino Royale, just so he had someone to sleep with at the end of the film. Imagine if after Tracy died in OHMSS, he popped back to sleep with Ruby again: it would undermine the emotional journey the film had attempted to show Bond going on. Also, the film's dialogue is no better the TND - and is starting to show as a real weakness of the Brosnan era - did the filmmakers imagine us laughing at Bond referring to a 'cold reception' when he was about to ski? I thought Christmas only comes once a year! Really? that's like having a character called Miss Heaver, just so you can do a limerick at the end - poor. Renard also has to go down as one of the biggest wasted opportunities in the series. He can't feel pain, something we fully explore as he...er...puts his hand through a table (EEEEEEVILLLL!). The final fight is a damp squib also. Oh and the scene I am referring to not liking is Bond confronting Electra about Renard knowing where to hurt him, and his repeating her motto: Brosnan overplays this scene and comes off as petulant rather than no-nonsense.
So let's deal with the good (IMO). First of all, despite being of a similar age (if, obviously slightly younger) than GE and TND, it is aging better than either of them. there is very little in the film to suggest that it could not have been made in the last couple of years. The PTS is one of the very best of the series (with Brosnan coming off as absolutely ruthless in the banker's office and even sounding like Sean - 'hidden asshetsh'). Bond landing from his fall into the title sequence also marks the film's determination to evoke OHMSS. Bond gets injured! Now we are used to this with DC, and it is kind of forgotten before the end of this film; but this was revolutionary stuff at the time. Bond was human, and we were about to at least try to explore that. The opening titles are good and reflect the plot of the film well, and the theme is decent, if not exactly a series highlight. Bond doesn't fall in love often in this series - nor should he, but I would put Bond-Electra King alongside Bond-Vesper and Bond-Tracy as one of the three examples in the series where it is sold to us that he has. Sophie Marceau sells herself as the damaged girl that Bond wants to help - much the way that he does with Tracy. The film even references Stockholm Syndrome, which with it brings all sorts of questions about Bond having got himself involved with her. Brosnan tries also to further the theme touched on in TND of Bond as World weary and conflicted. He is falling in love with Electra - something not conducive to the life he has chosen and, in fact, the last time this happened, the woman died. As he tells Electra 'this is a game I can't afford to play'. When he is asked about how he deals with the life, he looks for just a moment like he is going to open up and talk to Electra, but then he thinks better of it and just tells her that he 'takes pleasure in great beauty' - something that in itself is sort of true, if we accept that Bond accepts the life and deals with it by getting what fun out of it he can. It is a patchy performance in places (the aforementioned 'isn't that your motto!' scene), but at its best it is his finest performance and the fullest attempt to give one of the Brosnan films some meaning and character development - and I include the Bond-Trevelyan story arc, and Bond being captured in DAD in that statement.
I have avoided this film for a while for fear of looking stupid, but I have to do it: Licence To Kill and Goldeneye are more consistent films, but this film had higher ambitions that it sometimes met. So:
1. OHMSS
2. Dr No
3. The World Is Not Enough
4. Licence To Kill
5. Goldeneye
6. Live And Let Die
7. The Living Daylights
8. Tomorrow Never Dies
9. For Your Eyes Only
10. Diamonds Are Forever
11. The Man With The Golden Gun
12. Never Say Never Again
13. Octopussy
14. A View To A Kill
You have echoed my feelings towards TWINE. (my review is a couple of pages back ;-))
Although I respectfully disagree with you about Bond and Elektra, in getting over her so quickly;
In Fleming's Casino Royale, at the end of the book, it says;
“He saw her now only as a spy. Their love and his grief were relegated to the boxroom of his mind. Later, perhaps they would be dragged out, dispassionately examined, and thrust back with other sentimental baggage he would rather forget.”
So I find Bond getting with Christmas entirely feasible. Whatever his feelings towards Elektra, they didn't matter, they are in the “boxroom” now. I imagine Bond getting drunk one day, and going over all off his “boxroom” memories, and then thrusting them back in. Besides, after Bond's experiences with Elektra can you really deny him some “fun time” with the Dr? ;-)
Plus, when Tracy dies, in the novel You Only Live Twice, Bond has “relations” with some escorts, just to see if Tracy's death has affected him adversely, should we say...
Thank you for your kind words in "The originals thread", by the way. It's therapeutic talking about it.
This time I enjoyed it even less. Connery may be my favourite Bond, but he also seems to have the smallest operating window of all of the Bond actors. He is perfect until he gains weight, loses the smallest amount of interest or the wigs get silly as they get more extensive. In this film he is far from fat or old, but he looks too heavy in the face, and the wig doesn't look right. I expected it for DAF, as it had been a few years and we were in the 70s, but Connery was only 36 at the time of filming this. I guess that is the price he pays for being so right for the role to begin with - he is competing against his own earlier perfection every time he takes the role on, and by this point he has neither the fitness or interest to look quite right in the role. When we compare this to the shape he was in early in his run or the effort Craig has put into his fitness each time so far, this is weak stuff. Connery is on autopilot, and it is showing far earlier than I remember. The plot is dull, and like with the Star Wars special editions 3 decades later the film is attempting to portray effects that technology has not advanced far enough to convey convincingly. Bond himself is not at all likeable in this film - his attitude to possibly having to marry an ugly wife, when the marriage is only for appearances and part of the job is all wrong - Bond should be first and foremost professional. This film doesn't have the timeless quality of the earlier entries. I am too disappointed to say too much more about it. It beats Diamonds Are Forever for less ill-judged humour (even though DAF was not as packed with that as I remember), and for one or two excellent action sequences, but most damningly it falls behind not only one, but two Roger Moore films. So,
1. OHMSS
2. Dr No
3. The World Is Not Enough
4. Licence To Kill
5. Goldeneye
6. Live And Let Die
7. The Living Daylights
8. Tomorrow Never Dies
9. For Your Eyes Only
10. You Only Live Twice
11. Diamonds Are Forever
12. The Man With The Golden Gun
13. Never Say Never Again
14. Octopussy
15. A View To A Kill
Anyway, I don't really like this film anymore - though I would expect Roger Moore fans would love it. I think this has to be put down to the aforementioned fact that this is my 6th Moore film this time. I can't watch him letch over women anymore, I can't watch his poor excuse for action scenes, and I am thoroughly sick of these so called funny scenes of extras showing 'comedy' anger at Bond's destruction, or confusion that maybe their drinks have been spiked or they have just had too much to drink. Also, the series is now seriously starting to repeat itself. The dropping of people through the floor of the lift recalls Blofeld's lift in DAF; the whole plot is very close to YOLT; even actors such as George Baker and Shane Rimmer (who I saw last night in the film this virtually remakes - YOLT) are starting to be recycled; and the fight on the train with Jaws is almost identical to the LALD fight with Tee Hee. I understand these films are formula, but a virtually identical scene two films apart is unforgivable really. Stromberg's lair looks like Dr No's lair to a degree, and Anya Amasova (a previous favourite of mine, probably due to Barbara Bach being such a beautiful woman) has no screen presence at all. The score is also horrible, in particular after XXX and Bond escape Jaws in the damaged van - leading to a score that is played purely for laughs. I don't think the filmmakers have ever heard the expression 'less is more'.
Now for the good - because, there was some! The title song and title sequence are amongst the very best in the series (the title sequence also has surprisingly far more visible nudity that I remember). The sequence is also well timed to the song, something that started to elude Binder after this entry. The film has the only Roger Moore exchange I ever found funny - 'James I need you!', 'So does England'. The locations are pleasant and the film's well shot. It is still, IMO, the third best of the Moore era (so far) and a country mile above TMWTGG, Octopussy and AVTAK. I was not bored like I was with those three, and there are sequences where it is all played quite serious - and these are the sequences that work well. There is genuine tension at the pyramids. So it isn't all bad by any means, but is one of the big disappointments of my run this time. I would be interested to know where I may have ranked it had I watched it instead of LALD earlier in the run, when my goodwill for this incarnation of Bond hadn't been utterly exhausted. It stills goes ahead of DAF - as that film just falls apart in the second half, whereas this is far more consistent in what it is trying to do. Overall, it does fall into a section of films that are mediocre, rather than bad. I hate to be so harsh, as I know there are many on this site who enjoy Roger Moore, but he is now, definitively, not for me, despite my saying some nicer words earlier in this run. I am dreading Moonraker. So,
1. OHMSS
2. Dr No
3. The World Is Not Enough
4. Licence To Kill
5. Goldeneye
6. Live And Let Die
7. The Living Daylights
8. Tomorrow Never Dies
9. For Your Eyes Only
10. You Only Live Twice
11. The Spy Who Loved Me
12. Diamonds Are Forever
13. The Man With The Golden Gun
14. Never Say Never Again
15. Octopussy
16. A View To A Kill
1. OHMSS
2. Dr No
3. The World Is Not Enough
4. Licence To Kill
5. Goldeneye
6. Live And Let Die
7. The Living Daylights
8. Tomorrow Never Dies
9. For Your Eyes Only
10. You Only Live Twice
11. The Spy Who Loved Me
12. Diamonds Are Forever
13. The Man With The Golden Gun
14. Never Say Never Again
15. Moonraker
16. Octopussy
17. A View To A Kill
I can say that I sincerely enjoyed LALD and FYEO.
I'll say the same! I wish I had the time to crank 'em out like that! Luckily I found time this weekend to squeeze in TSWLM and MR, and start the first few minutes of FYEO. I have a feeling it'll be a little while before I am afforded the chance to resume FYEO, sadly, because it is a favorite of mine.
Anyway, both my first viewing and this one elicit the same responses. The film is really good for 36 minutes (until Jinx emerges from the sea), okay until 50 minutes (clinic scene - some issues such as blatant TMWTGG rip-off with the hall of mirrors and some over the top fast and slo-mo camera work). There are small issues in that timeframe (bullet in the gunbarrel, birds of the West Indies, poor effects work when Bond walks across the bridge into the fog when released), but so far, it looked good. I kept hearing Brosnan looked too fat and old. To tell you the truth that was true on the big screen, but he has always looked fine on the small screen, no matter how big the TV and how true the resolution. From then on there are minor positives. if this era ever has a new Maud Adams - a woman playing a second role as a Bond girl, then please let it be Rosamund Pike - we are due a Blonde for DC - she was great, and was too young for PB, but would not be now.
From the hour point on the film is terrible. The first dent is London Calling - doesn't suit a Bond film, then we have Graves parachuting into Buckingham Palace. So, we later find he was General Moon, how the hell does anyone go through the full course of genetic therapy, create a new persona and do enough to get knighted in 14 months. From then on I don't know if I have anything fresh to offer in terms of insight. The CG is awful, the dialogue is worse than ever, the gadgets are terrible, Halle Berry doesn't work, Gustav Graves has based his whole persona on a man he met for a matter of minutes, the direction is an embarrassment - it screams 'look at this', when there was no need for such stupid tricks and the ramping and slo-mo - and the film never sells the idea Graves and Moon are the same man, and Moneypenney has suddenly reverted to her Lois Maxwell personality with no warning (at least in TWINE it seemed vaguely sardonic). Then we end up with Robocop at the end. Plus 'bitch' - please.
I struggle with this film after the rest of the Brosnan era, but I can always stand to watch it (my wife is a fan). So I have to score it just above the first of the films that bore me to death, even though I must stress it is extremely poor. so,
1. OHMSS
2. Dr No
3. The World Is Not Enough
4. Licence To Kill
5. Goldeneye
6. Live And Let Die
7. The Living Daylights
8. Tomorrow Never Dies
9. For Your Eyes Only
10. You Only Live Twice
11. The Spy Who Loved Me
12. Diamonds Are Forever
13. Die Another Day
14. The Man With The Golden Gun
15. Never Say Never Again
16. Moonraker
17. Octopussy
18. A View To A Kill
I am very slow to hail anything new as my favourite, as I need time to live with things and give them time to grow in my mind. Casino Royale has been on the cusp the last few times I have seen it though, and I approached it this time with a definite feel that the film I have been calling my favourite since the 1990s could be about to drop. A feeling that was slightly exacerbated when I had more of a problem with Lazenby when I watched Majesty's last week. That film still wins out on score and spectacle. Casino Royale is a remarkable film though. There are often complaints that it doesn't feel like a Bond film. To me it does, and is certainly no more off formula that OHMSS (though as with that film I wouldn't like them all to be like this). We lack Moneypenny and Q, but we have lacked the latter before in entries and, after the invisible car and the passing of Desmond Llewellyn, a rest for the character was appropriate enough - I hadn't really warmed to Cleese. On the matter of it being a reboot, I think that would have been an issue in 2012, but in 2006 only Batman Begins had done this, and Casino Royale had been scripted and was deep into casting by the time that was released. Hollywood had yet to hold up the reboot as the answer to each and every one of their problems, and this was fresh. The producers argue that a reboot was necessary as the story was much smaller in scale and was not appropriate for a veteran 00 agent coming off something like DAD. I remain agnostic on this, as I haven't see CR properly presented any other way than it is now. I don't want to see Bond at school, at University or in the navy, but I can live with him being a newly minted 007. Also, watching this 'blunt instrument', a trained killer, learn to become a gentlemen emphasised that they had got the character the right way around for me.
The PTS sequence was refreshing both in its brutality and it simplicity. I now know the kills are different from the book, but it works. The changes from the book are normally sensible enough, the film doesn't really have the time to explain Baccarat, and most people have at least a passing understanding of what poker is. Actually one of the film's rare missteps is Mathis turning into Basil Exposition to explain the card games both to Vesper and slower viewers. The other misstep was the sinking building at the end, but I understand also that Bond films have to end with action: you just couldn't have had it like the book where Vesper commits suicide a few weeks after Bond wins a card game. The dialogue in the film has some weaker moments ('Omega', 'beautiful'), but is very much stronger in general. Dame Judi seems to up her game having a new Bond to play against. The film is just beautifully made and cut together and the score is a long way ahead of anything else we had received since John Barry. I also love the title sequence and accompanying Chris Cornell track. Most things divide Bond fans, but title songs more than most. In terms of ballad or rock song I have no horse in that race, but I do like something a bit harder when we have a change of Bond; makes it seem more of an event somehow - and I love this song. It says to me Bond is a killer, he will switch his emotions off where he can and he needs to learn to look out solely for himself as, in this life, no-one else will.
If Sean Connery is the Bond I fell in love with, then Daniel Craig is the Bond I cheated on Sir Sean with, then had to do the walk of shame home in the morning. Okay enough of that queasy metaphor. The guy is phenomenal in this film. I have never seen a Bond actor more committed, more driven to give the role something new. For those who think he is not sophisticated enough for the role, I can respect that. There is still humour there, it is just isn't ladled on with a trowel this time ('that last hand nearly killed me'). For me, Craig did what truly great actors do with a previously established role: he gave me not only what I was not expecting, but also what I didn't even know I wanted. Marlon Brando did this in the Godfather - he played the role small and softly spoken, and that has become a trope of mafia bosses since, despite not really being an established interpretation before he did it. DC is not the literary Bond (though as I said elsewhere, I don't claim to be an expert) - we will never get that exactly, and for those championing Dalton, I get that, but the general public never really warmed to him (LTK does rock though - the biggest lesson of this run). DC presents a Bond far more physical than his predecessors (Lazenby is the only one even in the argument), but the slight coldness of tone, and interest only in married women that he does not have to commit to in anyway is evocative of the book equivalent. It is too early in his run to anoint him the king, but he replaced a Bond I liked very much and totally changed what I wanted from the character. He may not yet be King, but, by God is he now in the argument.
In terms of scoring. If you swap the lead actors from the two films, OHMSS would still come out over CR (though Bond would be played by a toddler in the former and a pensioner in the latter if we took it literally), as Majesty's has a similar emotional journey, and is part of an era of Bond films that cemented my love for this series - it remains the best looking Bond film too. After reading some of the books, I thought FRWL would be the strongest contender to unseat a film that I had experienced more problems with this time (it may still do), but after 6 years of living with this incarnation of Bond, and adoring it both today, and about a month ago when I watched it with friends, I have to buck both tradition and my notorious slowness in changing my mind. Welcome Daniel, what took you so long:
1. Casino Royale (2006)
2. OHMSS
3. Dr No
4. The World Is Not Enough
5. Licence To Kill
6. Goldeneye
7. Live And Let Die
8. The Living Daylights
9. Tomorrow Never Dies
10. For Your Eyes Only
11. You Only Live Twice
12. The Spy Who Loved Me
13. Diamonds Are Forever
14. Die Another Day
15. The Man With The Golden Gun
16. Never Say Never Again
17. Moonraker
18. Octopussy
19. A View To A Kill
To me Casino Royale felt very much as a James Bond film. It had the scope et al to it. It was refreshing, to say the least.
Thank you - although in hindsight the best thing to ladle something on with is a ladle, not a trowel.
:)
I may not have explained myself too well on why I put CR top tonight either. I think what I am trying to say is that they have a lot of similarities and a few contrasting strengths. I think OHMSS is more beautiful and has a better score and locations. I think CR has generally stronger performances and a slightly stronger script. Casino Royale probably takes it on the quality of Craig's performance alone. The reason I say that if you swapped the leading men it may be the other way around is that when I watched OHMSS last week, the central performance of Lazenby gave me more problems than usual. I don't think he is terrible, he just has little presence outside of the action scenes. It may still top the charts again in the future, but this time it left me with a feeling of 'well I love it....but'. So if you put Daniel Craig into that role - or at least a performance of equivalent quality, there is a very good chance it would have stayed top. Objectively as I can, I guess I am saying that Casino Royale has a little more going for it than OHMSS, but Majesty's has always stayed in the argument because it is the very best, for me, of an era of Bond films that shaped and defined my love of the series. When someone says 'James Bond' to me, I first think of the 1960s. To have a film as beautiful and emotionally resonant as that film set in that era is always going to put it close to my heart. Casino Royale doesn't have that link the 60s, but it has a similar emotional resonance and a far, far better leading man. Hope I explained it better that time.
As for Bond and Vegas. That really was too blanket a statement from me; I can see Bond having an adventure that takes in the Las Vegas of Ocean's Eleven. What it may have been better to say is that Bond and THAT Vegas don't mix. In DAF it is a tacky, tired looking town that does not resemble the cinematic representation of the town that we get today, and Bond and tacky and overblown don't really mix.
Looking forward to the rest of your review!
I was excited to watch this, but feared that it would be a film that I could not make any objective observations about. I say that because I know the film so well and it is all familiar pop culture tropes. It is like watching The Empire Strikes Back for me: how much do I really listen to the dialogue and watch the story unfold, when I wouldn't be far away from being able to write it all out from memory? Consequently, I will keep this shorter than most reviews. I love this film tonight as much as ever. The most familiar complaint I hear about the film is that Bond does nothing for such a long portion of the film, and does not do anything to resolve matters at the end: it is all done for him. That is valid, though to a lesser degree, would Raiders Of The Lost Ark have a different conclusion if Indy wasn't there? The plot of the film would unfold exactly the same. The film also continues to hold its pace through this section, and Bond uses his time to understand Goldfinger's aims and to try to get a message out to Felix.
The reason I am keeping this short, is I can sit and argue to toss about the relative merits of other films in this series, but this film is just such a strong part of my film history, and so familiar to me from such a young age, that it defies rational analysis in a way that FRWL does not, despite my having more regard for the latter historically. That may well be a sign that FRWL has a more tangible plot to discuss, or it may reflect that Goldfinger is more suited to working itself into the heart of a child that FRWL. There is a reason I am holding off on From Russia With Love - more on that in a couple of days. In the interim I will cover Thunderball and Quantum Of Solace - in either order. Whatever the case with regard to Goldfinger, I put it ahead of Dr No as a film of which I have an enduring love, as a film with a with a more assured, and slightly bigger Connery, and a more settled style, but behind Majesty's and Casino Royale. FRWL may be the first Connery I saw, but this was the first one to get under my skin as a boy. So, sorry for the lack of analysis, but this pop culture Juggernaut just defies critical reasoning for me.
1. Casino Royale (2006)
2. OHMSS
3. Goldfinger
4. Dr No
5. The World Is Not Enough
6. Licence To Kill
7. Goldeneye
8. Live And Let Die
9. The Living Daylights
10. Tomorrow Never Dies
11. For Your Eyes Only
12. You Only Live Twice
13. The Spy Who Loved Me
14. Diamonds Are Forever
15. Die Another Day
16. The Man With The Golden Gun
17. Never Say Never Again
18. Moonraker
19. Octopussy
20. A View To A Kill
So far this series has been a pretty even mix of good and bad surprises. This goes alongside Licence to Kill as one of the standout positive surprises of this run. This was the most beautiful Bond film that had been made to this point, with the switch to 2.35:1 aspect ratio really adding to the films' feeling of scope. Connery, although looking slightly odd in left profile, still looks good in the role. He is fit, moves really well - particularly in the way he walks at the clinic, and he has the first signs of a slightly cruel edge to the way he played the role - outside of the slaps we see in earlier films: I could feel his slight air of coldness to his fellow man this time, whereas in earlier films it seemed more an affectation to get the job done. This is is best performance in the role in this run (don 't forget I haven't seen FRWL yet this time); even if nothing is likely to match the impact he made on me in the first half of Dr No this time - probably because I had come off a run of other Bond's that didn't match him for me. He had little emotion to the death of Paula, and was very to the point in the way he told Volpe that what he had done was for King and Country. Volpe is fantastic: though having seen these films in a different order it was impossible not to think of Helga Brandt. It is clear to me that Brandt was an attempt to evoke this character, and it is great to see it done so much better here. The diving scenes have never been my favourite parts of Bond films - though diving is like skiiing for me, it is something I want each Bond to do at least once; but I loved them here. I would theorise that this is because I haven't seen Thunderball on the big screen and, given I watch it at home usually, this is the first time I have had Blu Ray and a 47 inch full HD display. That sort of thing makes a difference to films with such beautiful locations and cinematography. Domino is one of the more beautiful Bond girls, even if the actress made little impact on me, and Largo - whilst looking the part - does not make the impact of some of the other Connery adversaries.
In terms of ranking, the very presence of a fit and interested Connery guarantees it a high placing. It didn't have the strength of impact on me that, say Licence To Kill had this time, even if does have a greater feeling of scope somehow. it doesn't have the iconic elements, for me, of a LALD, even if the Bond here is even a different league quality-wise. It is not Bond-by-numbers like Tomorrow Never Dies; meaning I would probably put it around The Living Daylights in quality. I will rank it just over that for a better Bond (for me), better locations and more beautiful cinematography, as well as a more memorable adversary, even if he is not quite out of the top drawer. I enjoyed this a great deal. Two to go. So...
1. Casino Royale (2006)
2. OHMSS
3. Goldfinger
4. Dr No
5. The World Is Not Enough
6. Licence To Kill
7. Goldeneye
8. Live And Let Die
9. Thunderball
10. The Living Daylights
11. Tomorrow Never Dies
12. For Your Eyes Only
13. You Only Live Twice
14. The Spy Who Loved Me
15. Diamonds Are Forever
16. Die Another Day
17. The Man With The Golden Gun
18. Never Say Never Again
19. Moonraker
20. Octopussy
21. A View To A Kill
Tonight I put the film in expecting better, as I was hearing it does improve with each watch, but fearing that this would still feel like the red headed step-child of the Bond series. First the bad. The film is still rather abrupt. It starts with Craig wearing the wrong suit for it to be a direct continuation, but it cuts straight into an incomprehensible car chase, following on from a quite stylish first 15 seconds or so. We then move around far too quickly, the first time we go to London, we are at the agent's apartment for a couple of minutes, then straight to MI6, then straight to Haiti without the film breathing. The production design is still far too clean and lifeless, although the cinematography is lovely - though it still looks at the start like M is shot, so scenes are confusingly edited. Camille is still very limited in her impact. I still don't like homages to Shirley Eaton (see my Goldfinger review). This era of Bond is also accused of copying Bourne. Well, I would defend Casino Royale, as I genuinely believe that film would have stood as is had the Bourne Identity never been made - particularly as DAD hugely out-grossed any of the Bourne films Worldwide. The rooftop chase in Siena is pure Bourne Ultimatium however. Also the hotel room fight in Haiti is hugely reminiscent of fight scenes in the first two Bourne films -Bond even uses a pen. Bond having any kind of physical altercation with Dominic Greene is a mistake.
The more familiar I get with the film, however, the better it gets. The stylistic problem of awful shaky cam is most shocking and disappointing the first time you see it. Now I am past that, so I am better able to concentrate on the plot. The plot is actually pretty decent. Bond's movements around the World follow a logical pattern informed by the evidence as it unfolds. The scene at Tosca used to be one I hated because, knowing nothing about opera, the big eye look cheap and ridiculous (it may be standard for that opera - I have no idea), but it now comes off as a terrific example of Bond going about his work, something we haven't seen that much of since the early entries in the series. Bond does show character growth through the film, as he becomes less of a 'blunt instrument' and begins to understand that killing is not the preferred option. Daniel Craig is still mesmerising in the role and, in fact, this is a Bond film I seriously cannot see any of the other Bond actors playing. The films is better paced that I remember, though there is no doubt in my mind that the same basic plot spread over 135 minutes would have been a more satisfying experience. I also give a lot of credit to the film for the scene between Bond and Vesper's boyfriend, and the subsequent meeting with M; Bond drunk with grief on the plane, Bond subtly taking the picture of Vesper early in the film, and many other little touches lost on me in my rush to condemn this film on release.
In terms of scoring this film, this is more difficult than any other entry. It sort of doesn't feel like a Bond film - I gave LTK and CR definite passes on that count. It was a largely unnecessary entry, and it was damaged by the writers' strike. On the other hand, Daniel Craig remains excellent, Judi Dench gets a good chunk of screen time without dominating proceedings and, for all the films flaws, the films does seem to know where it wants Bond to go as a character. For the first time tonight I was able to see this as a fully fledged part of the series, rather than an ill-judged coda to a modern classic. I no longer feel let down in the way that I do when I watch Sean in YOLT. It is not anywhere near the standard of its closest match in style and non-bondness - LTK, nor can I rank it over even the most paint by numbers example of the Bond formula (for me) - TND. It is far too intelligent to be a generic action thriller, but it is far from a Bond film as I understand it. It would go somewhere around FYEO in that case, and top it because of a better Bond, and a more consistent, if too quick, pacing. Just FRWL to go. So.
1. Casino Royale (2006)
2. OHMSS
3. Goldfinger
4. Dr No
5. The World Is Not Enough
6. Licence To Kill
7. Goldeneye
8. Live And Let Die
9. Thunderball
10. The Living Daylights
11. Tomorrow Never Dies
12. Quantum of Solace
13. For Your Eyes Only
14. You Only Live Twice
15. The Spy Who Loved Me
16. Diamonds Are Forever
17. Die Another Day
18. The Man With The Golden Gun
19. Never Say Never Again
20. Moonraker
21. Octopussy
22. A View To A Kill
So, here I am at the end of this series. I just want to say a something about the unintended experience of watching these over a very short period of time, and then I will get on to FRWL. I had not intended to watch all of them so quickly, nor did I realise I would be finishing on the 50th anniversary. I intended to get some of my least favourite of the series out of the way while my wife was working away, then finish the rest on the Blu Ray box set in the lead up to Skyfall’s Blu Ray release. I started off with just a few remarks for each film and it has snowballed into the rambling overlong reviews I have written over the last couple of weeks. I like to write, and it has been a good mental exercise not only to sit and think about the films, but also to try to articulate those thoughts to others. I will still be watching about 2/3 of the series again to pretty much the original timeframe. I will be excluding YOLT and DAF as I am not ready to watch them again, and I have no intention of revisiting Roger Moore for a while. I need to forget the way I feel about his interpretation now, and revisit them fresh sometime in the future. I will likely review Skyfall once I have seen it a couple of times, but that will probably be on a different thread dedicated to that film. Also, I have no intention of trying to rank Skyfall in the overall series until I have lived with it for a few years – perhaps in the run-up to Bond 24. I will stick around these Boards, but I cannot imagine I will be posting with the same regularity of many of you, as I have no interest in arguing too hard with those holding different opinions: you hate Brosnan? Fair enough. You worship Roger Moore? Really pleased you enjoy him. I enjoy both sharing and reading opinion, just not arguing too hard about it. This has been fun. The only review I will revisit in the next 3-4 months will be OHMSS, as it was the first one I went to this time, and it received one small paragraph from me, despite its high ranking. So, whilst I will not revisit the rankings, I will do a full review of that film, probably in January.
Finally before reviewing the final film, From Russia With Love, some overall thoughts on the series and my rankings. First, Dalton is better than I remember. I still don’t love him, but one or two more LTK level performances would have moved him up my list. Even though he is a celebrated theatre actor he is, for me, a smaller performer somehow. I don’t what this says about him or me, but if Bond had ever been a TV series he would be my first choice, of all the actors, to lead it, even if some of the others have done TV. I don’t know why I say that, it has just stuck in my mind as an idea. I don’t like Roger Moore as James Bond. I tried. I really did. The longer I went on, the more I began to resent the length of his run in the role, and I hate watching him talk to women. I will have to rethink the running order next time I cover them all to try to mitigate the fatigue I felt watching him, and the effect it had on the later reviews, where I was depressed before the films had even started. Pierce Brosnan’s films, TWINE aside, are not aging as well as I expected, but I still defend his interpretation as valid and enjoyable. I will not change my rankings now, but I feel somehow that I have put TWINE, LALD and TND a place or two too high, LTK – the standout surprise of the series and arguably should have been top-5 for me – and FYEO too low (I predicted I would feel that way about FYEO). This was appropriate for how I felt at the time so I will let them rest. Sean Connery has to be almost perfect in order to be…er…almost perfect. I mean that, when fit, interested and with the right hairpiece he is the best thing to have happened to the series; but with any of those even slightly off it doesn’t work nearly as well (though I could just about go with the hairpiece in TB). He is the only actor, for me, who created his own archetype for the role and then had to try to meet that image and standard afresh each time out – with varying results. His first three films remain my blueprint for the cinematic James Bond series. Daniel Craig has the potential to be the best of the lot – and my God does he look like Steve McQueen when he calls on Mathis in QoS), but the producers have to stop worrying about what other film series are doing. This aping of other series is not necessary, Bond is not Bourne, just as the series isn’t Shaft, Bruce Lee, Indiana Jones, Star Wars, Miami Vice or any of the other tropes it has sometimes incorporated in response to the prevailing tastes of the day (even if some of those aped James Bond first). Lastly, for me this series has some films I really don’t like (perhaps another reason I will not remain as active on these Boards as some of you – I have loved James Bond most of my life, but I love only with about half of the actual films, enjoying about 3/4) – anything below DAF (though not including it) I actively disliked, despite many of them having elements I enjoyed, and anything from TND down to DAF seem fairly ordinary to me, by my usual judgement of cinema, even if they are good Bond films that I do genuinely like. That is a good thing though, as it is proof that this series is resilient. When we talk about films saving or killing the franchise either financially or critically that is, frankly, nonsense: there is a long tradition of cycles of bloat and purge, and that is not likely ever to end. After all of it, James Bond will return.
From Russia With Love goes last for a couple of reasons. First, it has long been in second place, so it was usually the film in my mind most likely to challenge OHMSS for top spot. Also, my reaction to Dr No this time – a film I had never been wild about – really sold me on the benefits of delayed gratification. I had held off on Connery’s peak years and ended up just loving his debut in a way I had not experienced before. I still figured by Casino Royale that I would watch in order the last three of the Connery’s I had not seen this time – FRWL, then GF, then TB – but I kept putting it off. I had read FRWL a few weeks ago and just loved the characters, the set-up…everything about it. I still believe the film to be the first of the Connery films that I saw, and it was an early favourite, although I think I preferred Goldfinger until the mid-90s.
So this afternoon I put the film in with great anticipation. It remains Connery’s finest of this series in every way. He never looks better in the role, with whatever hairpiece he is wearing in this film looking more natural in HD that the Goldfinger version does at the front. He has an easy natural charm, but never looks less than fully invested in both the role and scene in question. Small moments really stood out to me this time; such as the moment where he tells Kerim’s son that his father is dead. Connery plays this scene so...focused. The early 60s style of the film really suits the Bond series. Plot-wise, the story unfolds steadily and focuses on just the sort of device in which we imagine Cold War agents would have been interested – very like the ATAK in FYEO. Daniela Bianchi is perfect for the slightly naive Tatiana, without coming across as childlike in the way that I felt Honey Ryder did. I find it hard to believe this actress was only 21 years old at the time. Despite stunt work and choreography being far more primitive than we have now, the fight on the train between Red Grand and Bond is still, for me, the best example in the series of such a close quarters fight and head and shoulders over the Bond–Tee Hee and Bond-Jaws equivalents in later installments. Watching this film, it is so hard to believe the same series ended up going the way of Tarzan yells, parrots talking to the Prime Minister and California Girls-scored skiing sequences. This is the finest Connery entry, one of the best plotted of the entire series, and it has my favourite henchman and woman in Grant and Klebb. I like my Bond understated; and this is virtually perfect.
In terms of scoring, it is no surprise that it will be top-3. That top-3 sits head and shoulders over anything else in the series for me, and any one of them would grace the top sport. I am putting it third, as I didn’t enjoy it particularly more the OHMSS or CR, so see no case for putting it above either. In reality, there are all very close together, with more of a gap to what comes next.
My final rankings:
1. Casino Royale (2006)
2. On Her Majesty’s Secret Service
3. From Russia With Love
4. Goldfinger
5. Dr No
6. The World Is Not Enough
7. Licence To Kill
8. Goldeneye
9. Live And Let Die
10. Thunderball
11. The Living Daylights
12. Tomorrow Never Dies
13. Quantum Of Solace
14. For Your Eyes Only
15. You Only Live Twice
16. The Spy Who Loved Me
17. Diamonds Are Forever
18. Die Another Day
19. The Man With The Golden Gun
20. Never Say Never Again
21. Moonraker
22. Octopussy
23. A View To A Kill