Has this forum helped change your opinion on a Bond film?

2»

Comments

  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    You see, the cool thing about this forum is that it CAN have the power to change how you view a film. There are some films that I think I either hate or love until I speak about it with a friend and our discussions can open my eyes to see how I really feel about it deep down. Some films I hated I have a new respect for, and others I thought I liked aren't as great anymore.
  • Posts: 23
    Very good question. Yes, it has? I've never been a fan of LTK and whilst it will never become one of my favourites thanks to some other members' comments I can appreciate it a little more.
  • Posts: 11,189
    Regarding actors I do also have a bit more appreciation for Dalton since coming on here. While I've never DIS-liked him he's never been one of my favourites either. To be honest he still isn't and I still feel he lacks a certain something onscreen (despite his impressive height) - but I have more appreciation for what he set out to do than I did before.
  • 002002
    Posts: 581
    well having been on this forum i noticed alot of negative view on Brosnans Films
    but the forum actually made me really defend Pierce's Bond and i suppose thats a good thing
  • OP and TSWLM fair enough but I think FYEO is a bit overrated on here.

    I think lots of people just think it's automatically Moore's best just because it's a fairly serious film. I always thought it was pretty average and nowhere near as good as TSWLM, OP or even LALD. In terms of entertainment value I'd say even MR beats it.

    I don't see what so many see in FYEO. It has it's moments (ski chase, car chase, car kick, finale) and Moore is great as always but I think there's enough bad stuff in it (forgettable villian, Blofeld gets dropped down a chinmey, Bibi, ice rink fight) to balance it out and make it a middle ranker.

    Don't get me wrong it's not terrible and it's not Moore's worst (I'd put AVTAK, TMWTGG and MR below it), I just don't think it's as great as some people say.

    A little late but here's my take on it:

    I was a huge Connery fan when I was a kid and I couldn't stand Moore as Bond. Even when I was 13 I found his movies too juvenile and silly, and worst of all this punning clown who was PRETENDING to be Bond was not the kind of guy that I wanted to be when I grew up. So I could never make it more than 20 minutes into a Moore film on TV until I had to change the channel.

    Now, a friend my age who saw the Moore films in the theatre (starting with TSWLM I think) said that at the time that FYEO came out there was a huge OH THANK GOD factor that they had "fixed" the errors of MR. Of course, seeing the films out of order or one after the other on DVD makes this reaction not happen. As the famous saying goes, you had to be there...

    In the spirit of this thread I have more appreciation for Moore now. I still rate him my least favourite Bond but I can understand why people like him, especially after many eloquent defenses made by members here. But I still won't go out of my way to watch MR or AVTAK (the two Bond films I've never seen in their entirety). I made the mistake of renting LALD once and that was bad enough! ;-)

  • DrunkIrishPoetDrunkIrishPoet The Amber Coast
    Posts: 156
    I will never be a party to the modern revisionist view that "OHMSS" is actually a good movie. When I was a kid watching the Connery flicks on TV, "SS" was widely reviled as a turkey - an opinion I will no doubt hold to my dying day. Granted, there are numerous good things about it - but they are outweighed by the things that are laughable and ludicrous. GL's performance alone was leaden enough to sink the ship; after all, the most important thing about a Bond movie is Bond himself.
  • This forum has helped me parse my issues with Brosnan's performances and his overall tenure as Bond.
  • Posts: 4,762
    Yes. On Her Majesty's Secret Service. Made me see the light of how AWFUL it actually is!
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    00Beast wrote:
    Yes. On Her Majesty's Secret Service. Made me see the light of how AWFUL it actually is!

    And GF too, right? =))
  • Posts: 161
    The forum made me go back and view some of Roger Moore's Bond film's. Some are still awful but TSWLM and FYEO were excellent.

    The forum also cemented my dislike for Brosnan, a truely smug wimpy Bond.

  • Posts: 11,189
    OP and TSWLM fair enough but I think FYEO is a bit overrated on here.

    I think lots of people just think it's automatically Moore's best just because it's a fairly serious film. I always thought it was pretty average and nowhere near as good as TSWLM, OP or even LALD. In terms of entertainment value I'd say even MR beats it.

    I don't see what so many see in FYEO. It has it's moments (ski chase, car chase, car kick, finale) and Moore is great as always but I think there's enough bad stuff in it (forgettable villian, Blofeld gets dropped down a chinmey, Bibi, ice rink fight) to balance it out and make it a middle ranker.

    Don't get me wrong it's not terrible and it's not Moore's worst (I'd put AVTAK, TMWTGG and MR below it), I just don't think it's as great as some people say.

    A little late but here's my take on it:

    I was a huge Connery fan when I was a kid and I couldn't stand Moore as Bond. Even when I was 13 I found his movies too juvenile and silly, and worst of all this punning clown who was PRETENDING to be Bond was not the kind of guy that I wanted to be when I grew up. So I could never make it more than 20 minutes into a Moore film on TV until I had to change the channel.

    Now, a friend my age who saw the Moore films in the theatre (starting with TSWLM I think) said that at the time that FYEO came out there was a huge OH THANK GOD factor that they had "fixed" the errors of MR. Of course, seeing the films out of order or one after the other on DVD makes this reaction not happen. As the famous saying goes, you had to be there...

    In the spirit of this thread I have more appreciation for Moore now. I still rate him my least favourite Bond but I can understand why people like him, especially after many eloquent defenses made by members here. But I still won't go out of my way to watch MR or AVTAK (the two Bond films I've never seen in their entirety). I made the mistake of renting LALD once and that was bad enough! ;-)

    I re-watched a bit of AVTAK yesterday - not that great. I used to really like it as a kid but I've realised how dodgy some of the scenes are with Moore and younger women. Moore gives an ok performance but he acts more like the cool but slightly over-the-hill uncle than James Bond. He's certainly not a "blunt instrument" put it that way (the "fight" in Zorin's warehouse is embarrassing and IMO is a good contender for worst fight scene in the series - at least Brosnan and Toby Stephens were still reasonably atheletic during the final DAD fight on the aeroplane).

    I appreciate not everyone likes FYEO but Moore does feel a bit more like Bond in it - at least compared to some of his other outings. He's more "down to business" but still has some of that Rog charm.
  • GF has also fallen in my rankings and I say that because it has been either copied or that too many homages are paid to this film which makes the potential for more originality a tad less possible.

    This forum has helped me see that not everybody hates QOS: we just don't like for there to be too much action in a Bond movie, especially after a film that is supposed to provide progress in the main character's quest while lost in this world.

    This forum has also made me realize how generic most of PB's movies were and the importance of keeping DC's great 007 films (they're not just Bond movies) original and introducing new elements of conflict and deeper character development and realism.

    We already have 20 films of which maybe 19 all followed the same predictable format just in different locations and new faces without explanation going downward like the cars dropping out of a plane in DAD.

  • edited January 2013 Posts: 11,189
    This forum has also made me realize how generic most of PB's movies were

    I sort of agree with you. I re-watched a bit of TWINE as well the other day (I really need to get out more). Its ok and there are a few nice scenes (the boat chase, the Scottish castle, the construction site with Bond and Electra, the casino, M confronting Renard in the cell, Bond killing Electra and Davidov - probably two of Brosnan's finest moments in the part) but it feels somewhat...average to be honest. The acting (and Pierce Brosnan) fluctuate from good to downright terrible (although Denise Richards does provide good comic relief) and, as a whole, the film doesn't have much...umph about it.

    I don't take a lot of pleasure in saying this but, while I still enjoy Brosnan, his films haven't aged very well. Casino Royale (and Skyfall) really feel like a shot in the arm in comparison - not just in terms of acting but in overall production. You get the sense the producers are trying harder a bit harder to do something different than they did with PB
    GF has also fallen in my rankings and I say that because it has been either copied or that too many homages are paid to this film which makes the potential for more originality a tad less possible.

    I don't understand why that should affect the rankings of the film itself though. On its own its still a fun "caper".
  • TWINE tried to be different but was muffled down due to changes throughout production. I bet we can all agree and PB himself with his comments on the writing that his potential was wasted for the most part. TWINE sure set the record that this new M owned her part even well after her introduction in GE....anyway.

    CR did have GE similarities which were pivotal for establishing audience familiarity with "this new guy" playing Bond (i.e. the closeups on the actors' eyes) when the character was waking up after being knocked down by a crash or in a coma. These styles are good at really forcing the audience to accept the new actor whether or not they try to own the role on the first film (fortunately DC accomplished this, and pushed it further successively).
  • Posts: 11,189
    CR did have GE similarities which were pivotal for establishing audience familiarity with "this new guy" playing Bond (i.e. the closeups on the actors' eyes) when the character was waking up after being knocked down by a crash or in a coma. These styles are good at really forcing the audience to accept the new actor whether or not they try to own the role on the first film (fortunately DC accomplished this, and pushed it further successively).

    Something I LOVE about both Brosnan and Craig.
  • AliAli
    Posts: 319
    It did make me reappraise the Moore era. I saw most of them as a kid and memory and other peoples opinion had made me think MR was the worst, but I went back to it a few weeks ago and found that I actually really, REALLY enjoyed it. It's silly, but it's still fun.
  • BAIN123 wrote:

    I sort of agree with you. I re-watched a bit of TWINE as well the other day (I really need to get out more). Its ok and there are a few nice scenes (the boat chase, the Scottish castle, the construction site with Bond and Electra, the casino, M confronting Renard in the cell, Bond killing Electra and Davidov - probably two of Brosnan's finest moments in the part) but it feels somewhat...average to be honest. The acting (and Pierce Brosnan) fluctuate from good to downright terrible (although Denise Richards does provide good comic relief) and, as a whole, the film doesn't have much...umph about it.


    TWINE fell a lot in my rankings upon rewatching it last year. I remember that when I saw TND and TWINE when they first came out they were the first Bond films where, walking out of the theatre, I felt a sense of disappointment and "I waited two years for *that*?". At least with TWINE I thought "Well, they TRIED to make a better film" which made me rank it above TND. But rewatching it I found it drab and dreary, and the potentially good elements are either squandered (like Renard being impervious to pain), lame (the action scenes), or the people involved didn't have the talent to bring it off (I swear I actually cringed and felt embarrassed in the theatre watching Brosnan's performance - the scene where he confronts Elektra was the turning point in my opinion of him).

    That said, there are some good elements, and the character of Elektra and Marceau's performance were quite good. Shame it couldn't have been done at a different point in the franchise's history, although Brosnan's Bond is the only one I could see being involved in this story.

  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,139
    Murdock wrote:
    Yes, I used to heavily dislike Licence to Kill. After being convinced to rewatch it again after all these years, It jumped from my bottom 3 to my top 5. :)

    Whoa! That's a massive leap. Glad you've found a new appreciation for it.
Sign In or Register to comment.