Controversial opinions about Bond films

15455575960700

Comments

  • RC7RC7
    edited August 2013 Posts: 10,512
    chrisisall wrote:
    I agree. Its one of the reasons I prefer TLD over LTK. Dalton seems just a bit too hammy in LTK - is that a controversial opinion Daltonites?
    A little, I'd say...
    b-(

    Agreed Wizard. This clip is a deleted scene, but I feel it emphasises the angle Dalton took in LTK. For some reason he seemed more inclined to draw on his Derbyshire roots than he did in TLD.

    Fast forward to 1:20 for Dalton does the Dales

  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    RC7 wrote:

    Where do you work mate? You want to check your terms and conditions as I'm pretty sure there must be some EU employment law that covers that.

    Covent Garden, near the tube. If it's not him, it's some bloke with his megaphone harping on about the horrors of capitalism.

    I was referring to your bollocks being crushed rather than the noise pollution. But I suppose there are jobs where that's contractual. Are sure you dont work in Old Compton St?
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    RC7 wrote:

    Where do you work mate? You want to check your terms and conditions as I'm pretty sure there must be some EU employment law that covers that.

    Covent Garden, near the tube. If it's not him, it's some bloke with his megaphone harping on about the horrors of capitalism.

    I was referring to your bollocks being crushed rather than the noise pollution. But I suppose there are jobs where that's contractual. Are sure you dont work in Old Compton St?

    Naturally the Soho district is exempt from any EU law that enforces careful wang handling.
  • Posts: 6,396
    RC7 wrote:

    Naturally the Soho district is exempt from any EU law that enforces careful wang handling.

    :))
  • edited August 2013 Posts: 3,494
    Thunderball is ultimately a mediocre entry for me. When it's good, it's great, like any scene involving Fiona Volpe, or the briefing scenes (both MI6 and SPECTRE). But when it's bad, it's awful, like Connery running roughshod over all things SPECTRE, and the compulsion to have every other scene underwater. On the whole, the film is bloated and too aware of its own success and is desperately trying to catch lightning in a bottle twice, which failed, as it always does.

    A few more controversial opinions:

    1. There should have been another film between Quantum of Solace and Skyfall. The turnaround from "you're too young and hotheaded" to "you're too old and injured" is too quick.

    2. Casino Royale, Quantum of Solace, and Skyfall all take place before Dr. No, and all the Bond movies are in one continuity.

    3. I don't mind the gun barrel in Die Another Day. In fact, Die Another Day was probably my first Bond, and I didn't like the difference in the other films.

    I was 9, give me a break.

    4. Brosnan's suits were the best in GoldenEye, though his hairdo was the worst.

    5. Licence to Kill has some hilarious line readings (mostly unintentional, I'd assume).

    It's a shame you got castigated for that one. Initially there were arguments that could be made for this theory when you consider that the film's opening in black and white practically invites that thought combined with CR being the original Bond novel. That was my initial impression as well, but the strongest theory of all for it being a reboot is that it's obviously not a "period piece" and has been thoroughly updated complete with poker in place of baccarat and other more modern innovations. And that EON has since acknowledged that a reboot it is, so you can't much argue for this theory. In the context of Vesper though, it does give Bond's reluctance to give up his bachelor's taste for freedom in OHMSS some meaningful background.

  • Posts: 13,655
    LeighBurne wrote:
    I'm not a particular fan of Goldfinger either to be honest. Always preferred Thunderball

    There we part company. Dont know if this is controversial or not but I loathe TB and really cannot fathom why a lot of people rate it so highly.

    OK so it is reasonably faithful to the book but dear Christ its dulllllll. Dont get me wrong its not the worst but I have to say if I find DAF and if I am willing to switch my brain off DAD more entertaining. If you remove the scenes with Fiona there really isnt much there to hold your attention.

    Well here's my controversial opinion: I love TB and never find it dull one moment. In fact I find it in many ways superior to Goldfinger.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    Ludovico wrote:

    Well here's my controversial opinion: I love TB and never find it dull one moment. In fact I find it in many ways superior to Goldfinger.

    Please expand on this theory.
  • RC7 wrote:
    Agreed Wizard. This clip is a deleted scene, but I feel it emphasises the angle Dalton took in LTK. For some reason he seemed more inclined to draw on his Derbyshire roots than he did in TLD.
    Off topic, but thanks a lot for that, I'd never watched any of those!
  • Posts: 13,655
    Ludovico wrote:

    Well here's my controversial opinion: I love TB and never find it dull one moment. In fact I find it in many ways superior to Goldfinger.

    Please expand on this theory.

    Though to do typing on the phone, but anyway, Bond is much more proactive in TB, the relationship between main Bond girl and him more central in the plot and instrumental to his antagonism with Largo, and I found the hijacking of the nukes meticulous and plausible. I love Goldfinger too, but I prefer TB.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,244
    Ludovico wrote:
    Bond is much more proactive in TB, the relationship between main Bond girl and him more central in the plot and instrumental to his antagonism with Largo, and I found the hijacking of the nukes meticulous and plausible. I love Goldfinger too, but I prefer TB.
    TB is my favourite Connery Bond, so I tend to agree here.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    Ludovico wrote:
    Ludovico wrote:

    Well here's my controversial opinion: I love TB and never find it dull one moment. In fact I find it in many ways superior to Goldfinger.

    Please expand on this theory.

    Though to do typing on the phone, but anyway, Bond is much more proactive in TB, the relationship between main Bond girl and him more central in the plot and instrumental to his antagonism with Largo, and I found the hijacking of the nukes meticulous and plausible. I love Goldfinger too, but I prefer TB.

    You put up a reasonable defence but hardly watertight.

    Yes Bond is more proactive once he gets to the Bahamas but the entire plot hinges entirely on the fact that Bond goes to the same hospital as Angelo. If Bond dodges the poker in the PTS then he spends the whole film with the Mounties and Group Captain Pritchard. Thats just poor plotting so I think it evens out Bond spending half of GF locked up.

    I'll give you that the Domino relationship is more integral - or at least it should be. Dont know what it is about Auger - shes gorgeous and everything - but she always comes off as less than the sum of her parts for me. I'd much rather have Luciana even though Claudine is the more beautiful. I can imagine Luciana would be wild in bed whilst Claudine comes across that she might be a bit of a plank of wood. So what should be the key dramatic scene in the film (the revelation that Largo topped her brother) always falls flat to me. Sean doesnt help looking bored out of his mind, his toupee appearing about to blow off and for some reason sporting those massive sunglasses.

    The hijacking is as you say 'meticulous' and is certainly a good scene - until the plane is ditched and then it drags on for another 10 minutes. I swear watching those blokes hammer pegs into that net proves Einstein's theory of relativity - I have lost decades of my life watching that scene. Particularly given that there was so much underwater stuff still to come you would think they would have chopped down what they could.

    Where is the pizzazz of GF? TB just seems like flat champagne compared with GF's sparkling vintage. Theres a definite sense of after the Lord Mayors show. I get the same with QOS after CR.

  • Posts: 13,655
    Ludovico wrote:
    Ludovico wrote:

    Well here's my controversial opinion: I love TB and never find it dull one moment. In fact I find it in many ways superior to Goldfinger.

    Please expand on this theory.

    Though to do typing on the phone, but anyway, Bond is much more proactive in TB, the relationship between main Bond girl and him more central in the plot and instrumental to his antagonism with Largo, and I found the hijacking of the nukes meticulous and plausible. I love Goldfinger too, but I prefer TB.

    You put up a reasonable defence but hardly watertight.

    Yes Bond is more proactive once he gets to the Bahamas but the entire plot hinges entirely on the fact that Bond goes to the same hospital as Angelo. If Bond dodges the poker in the PTS then he spends the whole film with the Mounties and Group Captain Pritchard. Thats just poor plotting so I think it evens out Bond spending half of GF locked up.

    I'll give you that the Domino relationship is more integral - or at least it should be. Dont know what it is about Auger - shes gorgeous and everything - but she always comes off as less than the sum of her parts for me. I'd much rather have Luciana even though Claudine is the more beautiful. I can imagine Luciana would be wild in bed whilst Claudine comes across that she might be a bit of a plank of wood. So what should be the key dramatic scene in the film (the revelation that Largo topped her brother) always falls flat to me. Sean doesnt help looking bored out of his mind, his toupee appearing about to blow off and for some reason sporting those massive sunglasses.

    The hijacking is as you say 'meticulous' and is certainly a good scene - until the plane is ditched and then it drags on for another 10 minutes. I swear watching those blokes hammer pegs into that net proves Einstein's theory of relativity - I have lost decades of my life watching that scene. Particularly given that there was so much underwater stuff still to come you would think they would have chopped down what they could.

    Where is the pizzazz of GF? TB just seems like flat champagne compared with GF's sparkling vintage. Theres a definite sense of after the Lord Mayors show. I get the same with QOS after CR.

    But Bond being at Shrubland was also in the novel. Yes it is coincidence and obviously convenient one, but it is the kind of coincidence one finds in fiction.

    Maybe Domino is etheral and not wild, but I always thought it was the point of the character: dominated, literally, by a possessive Largo. And the courting of Domino and rivalry between Bond and Largo have more dimension than the late appearance of Pussy Galore in Goldfinger. Again, I love the movie, but I just love this aspect of TB more.

    As for the very long hijack scene. Again, I don't mind, I wouldn't expect such operation to be short. One of the problems with many villain's schemes in the movies is that always seem to run very quickly, whatever the meticulous preparation they need. In TB, the long scenes makes it all the more believable to me.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512

    Where is the pizzazz of GF? TB just seems like flat champagne compared with GF's sparkling vintage. Theres a definite sense of after the Lord Mayors show. I get the same with QOS after CR.

    That's a sound analogy.

    Things can be shown as being meticulous without the need for a live stream of the entire process. While TB isn't quite that bad it's unmistakably flabby. I can only assume complacency on the part of the creative team ie. 'We made GF, whatever we do, people will love', combined with a clear obsession on the part of McClory to include as much underwater photography as possible. Give a clean copy of TB to a decent editor, plus a full soundtrack and I bet they'd make a slicker, ultimately better version.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    Ludovico wrote:

    But Bond being at Shrubland was also in the novel. Yes it is coincidence and obviously convenient one, but it is the kind of coincidence one finds in fiction.

    But did that ultimately have anything to do with the plot? I dont think it hinges upon it as it does in the film.

    Its a few years since I've read TB (not one of my favourites in any medium) but isnt the Shrublands scene just about Bonds fight with Lippe? Doesnt the chapter end with something along the lines of 'no one was to know but this duel between these two tough men had imperceptibly delayed a crime that was about to shake the world.'

    How did Bond get onto Largo and Domino in the book? I cant quite recall. But the whole Angelo/doubles thing is an invention for the screen.

    In the book dont they just send Bond after her because Petacchi was dodgy?

    Can anyone set me straight here?
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited August 2013 Posts: 13,322
    In the book Bond has a hangover and his physical assessment is poor, due to that and smoking. M puts him on a type of get fit quick scheme of two weeks at Shublands. Less coincidence there, at least.
  • Posts: 13,655
    Ludovico wrote:

    But Bond being at Shrubland was also in the novel. Yes it is coincidence and obviously convenient one, but it is the kind of coincidence one finds in fiction.

    But did that ultimately have anything to do with the plot? I dont think it hinges upon it as it does in the film.

    Its a few years since I've read TB (not one of my favourites in any medium) but isnt the Shrublands scene just about Bonds fight with Lippe? Doesnt the chapter end with something along the lines of 'no one was to know but this duel between these two tough men had imperceptibly delayed a crime that was about to shake the world.'

    How did Bond get onto Largo and Domino in the book? I cant quite recall. But the whole Angelo/doubles thing is an invention for the screen.

    In the book dont they just send Bond after her because Petacchi was dodgy?

    Can anyone set me straight here?

    There was no fight with Lippe in the novel. Beside in the film, in the PTS he fight Bouvar and it is not in any way related to Shrubland or the main plot, other than Bouvar is also from SPECTRE.

    There was also a thematic reason to the Shrubland episode in the novel: to contrast Bond's pleasure seeking and excessive lifestyle to Blofeld's puritanism.
    Samuel001 wrote:
    In the book Bond has a hangover and his physical assessment is poor, due to that and smoking. M puts him on a type of get fit quick scheme of two weeks at Shublands. Less coincidence there, at least.

    More of a coincidence in the novel, I think. Bond is sent to Shrubland, he just happens to find the protagonists of his future mission. And it is M who sends him to his assignment, out of intuition. A good reasoning, but still very intuitive. At least in the movie he goes to Nassau because he saw Derval lying dead when he was supposed to be alive and well.
  • M_BaljeM_Balje Amsterdam, Netherlands
    edited August 2013 Posts: 3,895
    RC7 wrote:

    3-4 scene's i have liked to be used. The sharky moment, whyle my first thinking whas Bond be a litle bit to relax whe he smoking. More Milton Krest with Thunderball boat/shipping (in specialy i like the begining when the camera have some distance and the sound of the sea.), give more inside of this chacter and location. I must think about my wish to see more of Vesper-Bond relation in CR too. The thing with Island, i must think a bit about Goldeneye with that. Another one, but i have same doubt as John Glenn be shadowman, again it show more location and it explain more who some chacters be but like asian guy scene in Casino it mabey created more quistion about the chacters. Mabey it give the movie bit more like FYEO with using 3 of them and made the movie les gritty, Bond more human. From that view i also can understand in the more violence style of the final movie there not used it. But from the view of Glenn his earlier movies and then i mean in specialy TSWLM, FYEO and TLD i don't.

    Iam happy that media thing in some hotelroom not be used, to loud and spoiled the moment of the leiter, exept mabey the part of that gun out if his drink.

  • edited September 2013 Posts: 6,396
    Controversial casting decisions article from Empire Magazine. SC is on page 7 and DC is on page 6. Interestingly, Empire state CraigNotBond.com is no longer in operation. Of course it is but just under a revised name

    http://www.empireonline.com/features/casting-controversies/p6
  • Posts: 140
    After reading this lengthy thread, I realize that my opinions aren't necessarily as controversial as I thought. Here goes anyway:

    -- Never been that impressed with Ursula Andress. Her character makes a memorable entrance. Other than that, she's a run-of-the-mill Bond Girl.

    -- Not a huge fan of Shirley Bassey. I feel that they really should have gone with Sinatra for 'Moonraker.' I have always been and remain opposed to the idea of bringing DSB back for a fourth.

    -- Donald Pleasance's Blofeld is a joke. Mike Myers barely had to change anything in order to adapt the character to full-fledged comedy. Telly's Blofeld is vastly superior, even if his Mid-Atlantic accent isn't thick enough for some people's taste.

    -- DAF would have been better with Rog than with Sean.

    -- Rog, not Sean, has been the definitive Bond in the public imagination for at least the last 30 years (Dan may be on the verge of changing things, though).

    -- LALD is one of the most fantastically entertaining entries in the series.

    -- Stromberg is not a particularly impressive villain, little more than a second-rate Blofeld stand-in.

    -- FYEO may well be the best of Rog, and Sheena Easton's song is also highly enjoyable.

    -- The wackiness of OP is tons of fun, even if it has little to do with Fleming.

    -- I'm actually kind of fond of Boris Grishenko. I wish he had survived so he could have come back for TND instead of that boring Henry Gupta character.

    -- Conversely, I'm not that impressed with the other GE bad guys. Alec "Janus" Trevelyan is a subtle rip-off of the Batman villain Two-Face. General Orumov is the least interesting of the various Evil Russian Military Officers that have appeared in the series. Xenia Onatopp takes the Femme Fatale concept to such ridiculous extremes that she seems to anticipate the Austin Powers movies.

    -- I enjoy watching Jonathan Pryce chew the scenery to tiny bits.

    -- DAD is not without its charms.

    -- QOS is a pretty decent Bond film.
  • ThunderballThunderball playing Chemin de Fer in a casino, downing Vespers
    Posts: 738
    00Ed wrote:
    -- Never been that impressed with Ursula Andress. Her character makes a memorable entrance. Other than that, she's a run-of-the-mill Bond Girl.

    I love Honey, she's one of my favorites. Honey is iconic. There were more interesting Bond girls to come later, but I dunno exactly why, I just like her a lot.
    00Ed wrote:
    -- Not a huge fan of Shirley Bassey. I feel that they really should have gone with Sinatra for 'Moonraker.' I have always been and remain opposed to the idea of bringing DSB back for a fourth.

    Bassey's okay. Nancy Sinatra is awesome, so yeah. Maybe you're right.
    00Ed wrote:
    -- Donald Pleasance's Blofeld is a joke. Mike Myers barely had to change anything in order to adapt the character to full-fledged comedy. Telly's Blofeld is vastly superior, even if his Mid-Atlantic accent isn't thick enough for some people's taste.

    Pleasence might be my favorite Blofeld actually, along with Savales. I think he was just under-utilized in YOLT.
    00Ed wrote:
    -- DAF would have been better with Rog than with Sean.

    Would have been better with Lazenby than either of them.
    00Ed wrote:
    -- Rog, not Sean, has been the definitive Bond in the public imagination for at least the last 30 years (Dan may be on the verge of changing things, though).

    True. But most feel Sean is the best...and at least part of that is because he was first and established Bond on film.
    00Ed wrote:
    -- LALD is one of the most fantastically entertaining entries in the series.

    LALD for me is at least the most fantastically entertaining Roger Moore entries. Otherwise....eh, not too shabby.

    00Ed wrote:
    -- Stromberg is not a particularly impressive villain, little more than a second-rate Blofeld stand-in.

    Totally agree.

    00Ed wrote:
    -- FYEO may well be the best of Rog, and Sheena Easton's song is also highly enjoyable.

    Easton's song isn't too bad. FYEO is Rog's third best for me, after LALD and TSWLM.
    00Ed wrote:
    -- The wackiness of OP is tons of fun, even if it has little to do with Fleming.

    A few parts here and there are fun, I guess. Otherwise, OP for me is one of the worst entries.
    00Ed wrote:
    -- I'm actually kind of fond of Boris Grishenko. I wish he had survived so he could have come back for TND instead of that boring Henry Gupta character.

    Nah, disagree on the return of Boris part. But the character in GE was pretty fun I guess.
    00Ed wrote:
    -- Conversely, I'm not that impressed with the other GE bad guys. Alec "Janus" Trevelyan is a subtle rip-off of the Batman villain Two-Face. General Orumov is the least interesting of the various Evil Russian Military Officers that have appeared in the series. Xenia Onatopp takes the Femme Fatale concept to such ridiculous extremes that she seems to anticipate the Austin Powers movies.

    I used to really like Alec as a villain...not so much anymore. Sean Bean is awesome though, maybe it's a writing problem.
    I still love Onatopp though. I love that she's ridiculous. Can't compare to Fiona Volpe in the black widow department, though.
    00Ed wrote:
    -- I enjoy watching Jonathan Pryce chew the scenery to tiny bits.

    I don't. I mean, it's kinda unintentionally funny, but that's all.
    00Ed wrote:
    -- DAD is not without its charms.

    Yeah, it's charming as all hell when the movie finally ends.
    00Ed wrote:
    -- QOS is a pretty decent Bond film.

    ABSOLUTELY! I really like QOS.

  • ThunderballThunderball playing Chemin de Fer in a casino, downing Vespers
    Posts: 738
    Re: all the talk about Thunderball being great or dull, I'll just say that it seems that I prefer boring Bond movies!
  • edited September 2013 Posts: 57
    00Ed wrote:
    -- Donald Pleasance's Blofeld is a joke. Mike Myers barely had to change anything in order to adapt the character to full-fledged comedy. Telly's Blofeld is vastly superior, even if his Mid-Atlantic accent isn't thick enough for some people's taste.
    I partially agree. For me, Pleasance varies wildly between great and terrible during the course of the movie. I definitely agree Savalas was the definitive on-screen Blofeld though.

    I agree with pretty much everything else you said!

  • pachazopachazo Make Your Choice
    Posts: 7,247
    00Ed wrote:
    Donald Pleasance's Blofeld is a joke. Mike Myers barely had to change anything in order to adapt the character to full-fledged comedy. Telly's Blofeld is vastly superior, even if his Mid-Atlantic accent isn't thick enough for some people's taste.
    I can't agree with calling him a joke. He's an OTT villain in an OTT film. Gray's Blofeld is a joke. I agree that Telly was the best.

    00Ed wrote:
    DAF would have been better with Rog than with Sean.
    Personally, I hate the idea of having a new Bond and a new Blofeld for three films in a row. If you dropped Blofeld as the villain then maybe.
  • Here's a few of mine :-

    TLD is not all that great

    The Lotus is cooler than the Aston Martin

    There's nothing wrong with Nick Nack - I still quite like him

    Tanya Roberts really wasn't that bad - there's a few Bond Girls I'd rank below her
  • EDDIEVH wrote:
    Here's a few of mine :-

    TLD is not all that great

    The Lotus is cooler than the Aston Martin

    There's nothing wrong with Nick Nack - I still quite like him

    Tanya Roberts really wasn't that bad - there's a few Bond Girls I'd rank below her

    Agree with you there.

    As for Roberts. She really was that bad but there were more actresses worse than her.
  • echoecho 007 in New York
    Posts: 4,797
    Lois Maxwell had more chemistry with Lazenby than any other Bond.
  • echo wrote:
    Lois Maxwell had more chemistry with Lazenby than any other Bond.

    That's actually a pretty good observation.

  • doubleoegodoubleoego #LightWork
    Posts: 11,090
    Jack Lord is an overrated Felix Leiter
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 20,644
    echo wrote:
    Lois Maxwell had more chemistry with Lazenby than any other Bond.

    That's actually a pretty good observation.

    I wonder if a younger Moore and a younger Lois might have had some more chemistry, say in the 60s. By the time LALD was filmed, I found Lois more of a sweet lady rather than a gorgeous girl.
  • edited September 2013 Posts: 2,337
    I'm going to agree with echo and double. The best Moneypenny film IMO is still OHMSS by a landslide. The only reason I rank Lord high as Leiter is because everyone except for Hedison and Wright have been absolutely terrible in the role.

    Also, to add to the comment that Lazenby/Maxwell had the most chemistry, I'm going to give the opinion that Moore/Maxwell had ZERO chemistry.
Sign In or Register to comment.