Controversial opinions about Bond films

1151152154156157705

Comments

  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,687
    Goodnight is perfectly acceptable (especially given the era), Bibi as well, Rosie was pretty bad, and Lupe was utter mindless perfection.
  • eddychaputeddychaput Montreal, Canada
    Posts: 364
    Welcome to the forum!

    Agreed on Jaws. I had played the GoldenEye game on the N64 long before I saw TSWLM or MR. Based of the 'Aztec' level, I had built up in my mind that Jaws must be frightening and unstoppable-- like 'if he gets his hands on you, you're dead', type of thing. I was so excited to see him in the movie! I was SO disappointed...

    Also agreed on LTK.

    Cause 007 is a WASP prefferebly English, definetly NOT GAY, and NOT politically correct. Anyone that thinks otherwise is an enemy of the franchise. (By ignorance, of course) Amy Pascal: "Stay away from EON & Danjaq, go produce other films"

    That's a little harsh, no? PLenty of film adaptations change element from the source material, be it a novel or comics or whatnot. I'd say your description of Bond fits the literary iteration of the character. If the Ian Fleming Foundation chose to do a continuation novel set in Fleming's time and NOT fulfill those qualities, I could see how that might be a bit weird. But for the films? No, there's no point in being that rigid. The franchise has survived plenty well thus far.
  • eddychaputeddychaput Montreal, Canada
    Posts: 364
    Birdleson wrote: »
    Can't you tell when someone is wired for confrontation?

    So he's behaving like Bambi and Thumper, basically?

    ;)
  • Posts: 7,500
    Regarding my previous Dr No shoutout: Yes, I know it wasn't controversial. I just felt a strong need to defend the film! ;) This thread is not only about stating controversial opinions, it's alsso about debating said opinions.
  • edited September 2015 Posts: 11,189
    Lazemby's performance??

    Tough one for me. It's fairly obvious his strength is in his physical...strength. But listen to his voice throughout the film. It rarely changes from how it sounds when he says "good morning...my name's Bond...James Bond".

    He is pretty terrible in certain scenes like the bull fight and the first meeting with Draco ("that's quite an inducement").

    BUT he is better in a few scenes later on.
  • Posts: 7,500
    When I think about Lazaenbys performance, 'uneven' is the first Word that comes to mind. Some might even say 'sporadic'. I remember him saying in an interview that what he most admired with the professional actors he worked with on OHMSS was their ability to stay hundred precent in character all the time. And I think that was his problem. In amongst glimpses of brilliance there is too much bland Lazenby and not enough Bond.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    I agree. It was definitely 'uneven'. However, it was surprisingly credible in the film, and somewhat vulnerable (if that's possible for Bond) without being artificial (something which cannot be said for others who've played the part).

    I admit that given his lack of acting skills, it was an extremely good performance, but I don't agree with many here who put him up there with Connery, Moore, Dalton or Craig. It was a good performance but likely was just beginner's luck.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    I believe the sum of all parts make OHMSS what it is today. One of the very best, arguably one of the 3 best Bond movies ever.

    Lazenby might have just fallen flat in another Bond movie, but I think the team effort put into OHMSS is probably the best in the whole series.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,687
    I think the team effort put into OHMSS is probably the best in the whole series.
    Unquestionably, IMO.
  • Posts: 11,189
    I can completely forgive the windsurfing in DAD as it eventually led to one of the best moments of the 50th anniversary documentary 10 years later.
  • BAIN123 wrote: »
    I can completely forgive the windsurfing in DAD as it eventually led to one of the best moments of the 50th anniversary documentary 10 years later.

    Brosnan cracking up is brilliant
  • Posts: 11,189
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    I can completely forgive the windsurfing in DAD as it eventually led to one of the best moments of the 50th anniversary documentary 10 years later.

    Brosnan cracking up is brilliant

    Whenever I see that scene in the film I always think of that same man laughing his head off and it makes everything better.
  • I agree.
  • Posts: 14,800
    bondjames wrote: »
    I leave DN out because I think it's the most overrated Bond film in the series. There's another controversial opinion!

    X_X

    My sentiment exactly.
  • Posts: 14,800
    On the other hand, I don't think DR. NO will ever be a favourite of mine. Unevenly paced with many an instance of filler, such as the out of the blue car chase, the film also suffers somewhat from its own amateurism, evidenced by the silly tarantula scene that it's robbed of any suspense it might have had due to the fact tarantula are harmless (and of course, the loony tunes sound effects), and moments of incredulity, such as Bond crawling through a series of pipes accompanied by strange sounds (?). A commanding performance by Connery and some iconic scenes don't make up for the fact that elsewhere, the film is pretty vanilla.

    It does not matter if tarantulas are harmless in real life. If the film says their bite is mortal, then their bite is mortal, period.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,328
    I like Dr. No better than From Russia With Love. Sure the score is weak but It's a more colorerful adventure film and you never know what's coming, From Russia With Love feels more like a SPECTRE origin film that occasionally stars James Bond.
  • Posts: 11,189
    Murdock wrote: »
    I like Dr. No better than From Russia With Love. Sure the score is weak but It's a more colorerful adventure film and you never know what's coming, From Russia With Love feels more like a SPECTRE origin film that occasionally stars James Bond.

    I don't know if you've read the book but in that Bond doesn't physically appear until over half way in.
  • Posts: 11,189
    My mistake.
  • MayDayDiVicenzoMayDayDiVicenzo Here and there
    Posts: 5,080
    Ludovico wrote: »
    On the other hand, I don't think DR. NO will ever be a favourite of mine. Unevenly paced with many an instance of filler, such as the out of the blue car chase, the film also suffers somewhat from its own amateurism, evidenced by the silly tarantula scene that it's robbed of any suspense it might have had due to the fact tarantula are harmless (and of course, the loony tunes sound effects), and moments of incredulity, such as Bond crawling through a series of pipes accompanied by strange sounds (?). A commanding performance by Connery and some iconic scenes don't make up for the fact that elsewhere, the film is pretty vanilla.

    It does not matter if tarantulas are harmless in real life. If the film says their bite is mortal, then their bite is mortal, period.

    But it doesn't, so Bond just comes across as a bit of a wuss.

    I'm remember watching somewhere (I think it was a documentary) how the filmmakers were boasting how it was such a "dangerous" feat for the stuntman, and how the tarantulas venom sack was full and so on.

    I'm not buying it.
  • MayDayDiVicenzoMayDayDiVicenzo Here and there
    Posts: 5,080
    The likes of MR and TSWLM, the logic of those films and their very nature, exist in a completely different world to that of DN, which plays it straight (for the most part). And that's where my problem lies regarding DN. I think it's just the scriptwriters thinking "oo a tarantula, the audiences will be cowering with fright when they watch this", and Terence and co. just went along with it. Even then, it's not even executed very well (there's clearly a pane of glass between the tarantula and Connery) and Norman felt like he had to add some silly sound effects when the poor thing's being battered to death.
  • SarkSark Guangdong, PRC
    Posts: 1,138
    The obvious glass barrier between the spider and Connery ruins any tension.
  • pachazopachazo Make Your Choice
    Posts: 7,314
    I think I've said it before but just because a tarantula bite isn't fatal doesn't mean it wouldn't hurt. I understand MayDay's point and perhaps it does take some of the tension away. However, I think I would still be spooked beyond belief to wake up with one crawling on me.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,687
    Murdock wrote: »
    I like Dr. No better than From Russia With Love. Sure the score is weak but It's a more colorerful adventure film and you never know what's coming
    Yes!
    =D>
  • Posts: 11,189
    Birdleson wrote: »
    Sark wrote: »
    The obvious glass barrier between the spider and Connery ruins any tension.

    That is the only part that takes me out of it a bit, but I still like the scene.

    I'd say it's more of an issue in TB with that shot of the hand and the shark.
  • Lancaster007Lancaster007 Shrublands Health Clinic, England
    Posts: 1,874
    Birdleson wrote: »
    More like a third of the way in (you may be getting it confused with THE SPY WHO LOVED ME, in that one he appears around the halfway point).

    He turns up in the last third of that novel.
  • Posts: 11,189
    I admit I haven't read TSWLM.

    Regarding FRWL, I do remember that there is A LOT of time setting up SMERSH's scheme, establishing the villains and explaining their backstory before Bond even shows up.
  • edited September 2015 Posts: 7,500
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    I admit I haven't read TSWLM.


    You should! It's a truly unique novel in the series, and Fleming's writing is at its best here. (My opinion anyway...)
  • edited September 2015 Posts: 14,800
    Ludovico wrote: »
    On the other hand, I don't think DR. NO will ever be a favourite of mine. Unevenly paced with many an instance of filler, such as the out of the blue car chase, the film also suffers somewhat from its own amateurism, evidenced by the silly tarantula scene that it's robbed of any suspense it might have had due to the fact tarantula are harmless (and of course, the loony tunes sound effects), and moments of incredulity, such as Bond crawling through a series of pipes accompanied by strange sounds (?). A commanding performance by Connery and some iconic scenes don't make up for the fact that elsewhere, the film is pretty vanilla.

    It does not matter if tarantulas are harmless in real life. If the film says their bite is mortal, then their bite is mortal, period.

    But it doesn't, so Bond just comes across as a bit of a wuss.

    I'm remember watching somewhere (I think it was a documentary) how the filmmakers were boasting how it was such a "dangerous" feat for the stuntman, and how the tarantulas venom sack was full and so on.

    I'm not buying it.

    So Dr. No sent a not deadly spider to give Bond diarrhea and nausea for a few days. Or he's a lousy scientist and knows zilch about spiders. Professor Dent is also a wuss, just like Bond, as he sweats heavily looking at that thing. The tarantula in DN us a fictitious spider from a fictitious universe. It's an inaccurate depiction of this particular spider. It often happens in fiction. You want a white shark that behaves like a true white shark, you don't have Jaws as a movie. Ah, and Dracula is rigged with inaccuracies of all sorts. Same with Tarzan. Of all the criticism you can make about the movie, this is the most nitpicking I have ever read.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,687
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    On the other hand, I don't think DR. NO will ever be a favourite of mine. Unevenly paced with many an instance of filler, such as the out of the blue car chase, the film also suffers somewhat from its own amateurism, evidenced by the silly tarantula scene that it's robbed of any suspense it might have had due to the fact tarantula are harmless (and of course, the loony tunes sound effects), and moments of incredulity, such as Bond crawling through a series of pipes accompanied by strange sounds (?). A commanding performance by Connery and some iconic scenes don't make up for the fact that elsewhere, the film is pretty vanilla.

    It does not matter if tarantulas are harmless in real life. If the film says their bite is mortal, then their bite is mortal, period.

    But it doesn't, so Bond just comes across as a bit of a wuss.

    I'm remember watching somewhere (I think it was a documentary) how the filmmakers were boasting how it was such a "dangerous" feat for the stuntman, and how the tarantulas venom sack was full and so on.

    I'm not buying it.

    So Dr. No sent a not deadly spider to give Bond diarrhea and nausea for a few days. Or he's a lousy scientist and knows zilch about spiders. Professor Dent is also a wuss, just like Bond, as he sweats heavily looking at that thing. The tarantula in DN us a fictitious spider from a fictitious universe. It's an inaccurate depiction of this particular spider. It often happens in fiction. You want a white shark that behaves like a true white shark, you don't have Jaws as a movie. Ah, and Dracula is rigged with inaccuracies of all sorts. Same with Tarzan. Of all the criticism you can make about the movie, this is the most nitpicking I have ever read.

    :)) Quite.
  • MayDayDiVicenzoMayDayDiVicenzo Here and there
    Posts: 5,080
    If you think it's nitpicking, then so be it. But it doesn't change the fact that the scene has never done anything for me (or others, it seems, as this scenes seems to be often commentated on), and I think it's just a case of an oversight by the scriptwriters (as evidenced in the documentary when they talk about Rosie (it's name) being fatal). Also, in a film that I could actually see happening in real life (much like the first two Connery films as they sell it so well), this scene just comes across as jarring. Should have used a black widow, then he's got something to sweat about.
Sign In or Register to comment.