If you want proof of how little some film reviewers know about Bond, click the link

Comments

  • OHMSS and GoldenEye receive the same exact ranking as Diamonds Are Forever and Moonraker while For Your Eyes Only, The Living Daylights, Licence to Kill, and Die Another Day all share in receiving the lowest ranking attributed to any of the Eon-produced films.

    This is where I put my Dr. Evil face on and say, "Riiiiiight."

    At least they didn't totally rag on Tomorrow Never Dies, The World Is Not Enough, and Quantum of Solace, which tends to be the case.
  • edited October 2015 Posts: 11,189
    "Bond goes rogue, and Dalton stays dull"

    Ouch!
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 14,171
    FRWL 'wierdly ungadgety'? He had a case full of 'em! And yeah, you can tell he's not a fan of Dalton; doesn't understand his take on the role. No mention of DAD's solid first half- these reviews seem like the usual cut-and-paste job. At least Maj and QOS get a fair wrap.
  • Posts: 7,506
    Hm, so the guy just decided to ignore Octopussy. I hope he knows it exists although it may well be he doesn't ;)

    Well, at least its nice to see he loved Spectre...
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 14,171
    @jobo Woah, you're right! Guess he's just too much of a gentleman to say the O word.
  • Posts: 498
    I wish no one would listen to critics and make up our own minds on movies,
    we're the die hard fans , the hell are they to say Bond movie are bad or good .
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 14,171
    "Everyone needs a hobby. Mine is critiquing something I know nothing about" :))

    But they're all good- most of them great, in my factual opinion.
  • I really really hate it when people talk about Never Say Never Again as if it's a proper Bond film. That's the biggest case for being thrown out a window.
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 14,171
    Superb Bond film, that NSNA. Best one in the canon.
  • Posts: 498
    QBranch wrote: »
    Superb Bond film, that NSNA. Best one in the canon.

    HAHA :))
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    TB. He says the series faltered? The film that really started the phenomenon! Idiot.
  • WalecsWalecs On Her Majesty's Secret Service
    edited October 2015 Posts: 3,157
    This surely has to be ironic, he can't be serious.
    Connery searches his hotel room for bugs for what seems like 10 minutes,

    I think that scene was barely 90 seconds long.
    The title is what Connery’s agent should have shouted at him when he was offered the comeback: (“Never”! Say “Never”! Again!)

    :)) =))

  • edited October 2015 Posts: 1,661
    NSNA does have a classic Bond moment - Bond rockets his bike over the car. Always loved that scene. I like the film myself. Has a nice 1980s vibe but I rate Octopussy higher.

    I think the Bond franchise's greatest asset is time. Due to the 50 plus years most reviewers and casual Bond film goers can't remember most of the content of the last 23 films! - so their reviews/rankings are fairly ignorant.
    "You know the Bond film when Jaws uses his hat to kill Bond, y'know when Bond's on the oil rig? What's that film called? Oh I know! Diamonds Are For Tomorrow!"


    ;)
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    I don't actually mind NSNA. Is an average Bond film...and it has Sean.
  • ThomasCrown76ThomasCrown76 Augusta, ks
    Posts: 757
    It has Kim basinger. Had the biggest crush on her in 87. I saw her in 9 1/2 weeks and I entered puberty way before anyone else my age ;)
  • Posts: 4,602
    This guy is a paid professional for The Guardian, its just utter tripe
  • Posts: 11,425
    Appalling effort here by Peter "spoiler" Bradshaw. Clumsy, poorly researched, error-strewn nonsense. But his reviews are often wildly off mark, so no real surprise.

    Interesting to see that so many of the comments on the Guardian site are saying how much people love Dalton though. I get the sense there's a growing community of Dalton fans out there.
  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    Posts: 2,138
    I'm no big fan of the Brosnan era but TND ahead of GE, the guy who wrote this has been sniffing glue.
  • Posts: 11,425
    I'm no big fan of the Brosnan era but TND ahead of GE, the guy who wrote this has been sniffing glue.

    Funny you highlight that. It's actually one of the points in these rankings I do agree with. TND is Brosnan's best IMO. That's not saying much, but the first half is moderately entertaining and Brosnan IMO works better as Bond in TND than any of the others.
  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    Posts: 2,138
    Getafix wrote: »
    I'm no big fan of the Brosnan era but TND ahead of GE, the guy who wrote this has been sniffing glue.

    Funny you highlight that. It's actually one of the points in these rankings I do agree with. TND is Brosnan's best IMO. That's not saying much, but the first half is moderately entertaining and Brosnan IMO works better as Bond in TND than any of the others.

    I found TND slow, boring and painful to watch I think GE was a far better movie, Bean was a better villain, the 006 plot twist was fresh, the locations were better, the finale on the dish. The supporting cast, the direction. Everything about GE was twice the file of TND. But I always find 1st outing are the best. It is almost like more effort goes in to get the audience to buy back in to franchise.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    It's so bad, it's Brilliant ! Did Steve Coogan write it :D
  • Posts: 4,602
    patb's law - left alone, all threads eventually focus on who was the best Bond or which was the best Bond movie.
  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    Posts: 2,138
    True Patb lets just laugh at the article HAW HAW HAW HAW! :))
  • edited October 2015 Posts: 11,425
    Well, the article was about scoring the movies....
    Getafix wrote: »
    I'm no big fan of the Brosnan era but TND ahead of GE, the guy who wrote this has been sniffing glue.

    Funny you highlight that. It's actually one of the points in these rankings I do agree with. TND is Brosnan's best IMO. That's not saying much, but the first half is moderately entertaining and Brosnan IMO works better as Bond in TND than any of the others.

    I found TND slow, boring and painful to watch I think GE was a far better movie, Bean was a better villain, the 006 plot twist was fresh, the locations were better, the finale on the dish. The supporting cast, the direction. Everything about GE was twice the file of TND. But I always find 1st outing are the best. It is almost like more effort goes in to get the audience to buy back in to franchise.

    I find all the Brosnan films painfully dull tbh, but none more so than TWINE, which I think I'd possibly rank as the worst in the entire series.

    GE was the biggest shock to me personally. As a Dalton fan, I perceived the total change in tone and direction with Brosnan as incomprehensible. But objectively speaking TWINE is an even worse movie, just for its pure tedium. At least DAD is hysterically awful. TWINE just bored me to sleep.
  • pachazopachazo Make Your Choice
    Posts: 7,314
    This list wasn't quite as bad as I thought it might be going in.

    Giving YOLT 5 stars certainly seems to be going overboard. Switch that with the 3 star rating he gave OHMSS and I'd be happy with the 60's.

    A 4 star rating to TMWTGG is a little incomprehensible to me but to each their own, I suppose. Other than that, the 70's look fine to me.

    Now he really went hog-wild with the 80's films, didn't he? FYEO and TLD at 2 stars? Yikes. Well, at least he got LTK right.

    Switch GE with TND and I could live with the rest of the Brosnan and Craig ratings. I've seen worse rankings than this. Not that I'd give it a full endorsement, of course.
  • Posts: 1,098
    The trouble with critics........and the news media, is that obviously some of them are not really Bond fans, or have any real knowledge of the franchise.........and that comes across in their reviews.
    I thought some of the ratings for the films, were quite inaccurate to put it politely!
  • Posts: 7,653
    As always on fansites we bitch about critics and why they are wrong. Three years ago anybody who actually disliked SF was considered a Craig hater on this site as well.

    The great thing about being a 007 fan is that you can enjoy various actors, writers composers etc and your personal preference does not make you any lesser a fan. I guess some critics would not know anything about the 007 franchise but it is their job to write about it and their preferences I could not care about. I generally avoid critics and their paid for opinions.

    I once met a newspaper critic who gave me his opinion about the then current 007 and he explained his dislike and knowledge about 007 and the franchise. I let him finish his argument before starting to poke holes in his knowledge. His only response was "shit, a fan!" The man did not write for fans he wrote for the general audience and his knowledge did not really damage anything his personal opinion did not stop anybody from seeing the movie as a 007 movie is still a big happening. And he acknowledged that the 007 franchise was something special even after all those years (must have been OP or AVTAK time).
    The only folks annoyed by paid critics are the fans who start with a huge advantage namely an larger knowledge than the average person, and larger interest as well. So if you do not want to be offended avoid critics.
  • Posts: 11,425
    Fair point.
  • edited October 2015 Posts: 6,844
    Yes, a fair point regarding critics, their opinions, and their at times very limited knowledge of the franchises they are tasked with writing about. However, as fans we are able to intelligently defend the films we love though they may not be held in high regard by popular opinion or criticize the films that disappoint or underwhelm us though they be held in the highest regard by popular opinion. We are also free to roll our eyes or scoff at paid critics who draw up a ranking of the James Bond series only to forget Octopussy entirely (now added, I see) or otherwise get some parts of Bond, to paraphrase Alan Partridge, so very, very wrong. If intelligently defended, fair play. If not and/or if riddled with inaccuracies, you deserve all the scoffing you get. This article sort of falls somewhere in between.
Sign In or Register to comment.