Is 'Tomorrow Never Dies' the most formulaic Bond film?

1356

Comments

  • BMW_with_missilesBMW_with_missiles All the usual refinements.
    Posts: 3,000
    Murdock wrote: »
    Just watched it again. It's a blast. A box ticker sure, but who cares? Why does that have to be a bad thing. Just sit back and enjoy the ride and have some popcorn with extra butter. It's going to be fun. :D

    And don't forget a ton of Dr Pepper! :D In fact, I think we just planned my Friday night.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,330
    Murdock wrote: »
    Just watched it again. It's a blast. A box ticker sure, but who cares? Why does that have to be a bad thing. Just sit back and enjoy the ride and have some popcorn with extra butter. It's going to be fun. :D

    And don't forget a ton of Dr Pepper! :D In fact, I think we just planned my Friday night.

    Oh yes that will be great. Enjoy it well my friend! :-bd
  • 4EverBonded4EverBonded the Ballrooms of Mars
    Posts: 12,459
    It's in my top 10 to stay I am pretty darn sure. Especially as I am so old now. ;)
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,894
    It might be, but I don't see a problem with it being formulaic. Without that formula, it isn't a Bond film. I make no apologies for my appreciation for TND. I enjoyed it on the back screen back in 1997 (it was my first big screen Bond), and I still enjoy it today.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited May 2016 Posts: 23,883
    I think the thread title should potentially read, "is tomorrow never dies the most obviously formulaic bond film".

    Then, I would say yes, followed by MR & SP for me.
  • Last_Rat_StandingLast_Rat_Standing Long Neck Ice Cold Beer Never Broke My Heart
    Posts: 4,413
    It was definitely one of my more watched/enjoyed Bond films of the early to mid 2000's. It wasn't until the Craig era came around, that I put the Brosnan films on the shelf for awhile. And realistically, they are still pretty shelved with the exception of GE. Nothing against his films or his era, as I have always enjoyed his tenure as Bond. I remember being like 12 or 13 and I was watching TND in my bedroom and my mom walked in during the scene with him and Prof. Bergstrom in bed, and she basically lost her s..t on me.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy My Secret Lair
    Posts: 13,384
    :)) I still love the idea of Bond driving a car by remote control. In fact I wish they had
    expanded on it, with Bond after a foot case ( but still controlling the car) ending up
    in another car ( being driven by the leading lady ) and using the bmw to block attacks
    from the villain’s cars etc.
  • Posts: 669
    To answer the specific question posted in the thread topic - no, I don't think this is the most formulaic in the series. I think the Lewis Gilbert trilogy (YOLT, TSWLM, and MR) are the most formulaic. TND does, however, often feel like an exercise in box-checking. I don't believe this is to its detriment, though. The film has problems (a wooden Teri Hatcher, some tonal issues, and a climax that goes on for over a HALF HOUR) but I don't personally feel that over-reliance on formula is one of them.
  • Posts: 4,023
    To answer the specific question posted in the thread topic - no, I don't think this is the most formulaic in the series. I think the Lewis Gilbert trilogy (YOLT, TSWLM, and MR) are the most formulaic. TND does, however, often feel like an exercise in box-checking. I don't believe this is to its detriment, though. The film has problems (a wooden Teri Hatcher, some tonal issues, and a climax that goes on for over a HALF HOUR) but I don't personally feel that over-reliance on formula is one of them.

    Lewis Gilbert certainly loved that formula, reworking it in all 3 of his Bonds, even recreating scenes. Compared to that TND is quite innovative.
  • BMW_with_missilesBMW_with_missiles All the usual refinements.
    Posts: 3,000
    :)) I still love the idea of Bond driving a car by remote control. In fact I wish they had
    expanded on it, with Bond after a foot case ( but still controlling the car) ending up
    in another car ( being driven by the leading lady ) and using the bmw to block attacks
    from the villain’s cars etc.

    Now that is a great idea!
  • edited June 2016 Posts: 48
    For me TND is my favorite Brosanan film and yes it is very formulaic but it's also probably one of the best pure, straight forward action adventure movie with a decent story and it does a fine job of working in the various ingredients. It has arguably some of the best action in the franchise and that's just the PTS. Also bonus points for Carver's death and the guy in the printing press. I have a "holy trinity" of sorts of what I think are the three best or at least my favorite pure action/adventure films, among them is TND, Raiders of the Lost Ark, and Total Recall(1990). Definitely a fave, and yes it follows the classic action/adventure formula to a tee.
  • edited June 2016 Posts: 48
    double post
  • Posts: 4,400
    I feel I may have been slightly harsh after going back to look at the film again.

    It's a fun romp. Nothing too taxing and mostly entertaining. Yes, it is rather formulaic and uninspired. However, it's an incredibly cinematic, action-packed 'Bond film'. It hardly skimps on the elements fans have come to expect from the series.

    Even for those who do condemn the film for being vacuous and empty, it's hard to deny that there is a satirical and rye bent to the film.

    Maybe in a post-Craig era, I've come to expect my Bond films to come with a degree of clout. However, that's why some Bond purists have turned against Craig's films for their attempt at being portentous.

    The series was always intended as light entertainment. In fact, with Spectre it looks like the producers want to return to this feel (this was really the chief reason I'm so mixed on Spectre - which attempts to have its cake and eat it).

    TND is solid entertainment. Also, not enough is said of Allan Cameron's sets. The Vietnam streets made at Frogmore is outstanding.

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited June 2016 Posts: 23,883
    I feel I may have been slightly harsh after going back to look at the film again.
    I saw it a couple of weeks ago, and think your initial assessment was spot on. Very derivative & predictable, and unfortunately quite unashamedly & obviously so. I felt the same way with SP.

    While many Bond films are formula driven in some shape or form from the early films, the trick (imho) is to at least try to make it feel fresh & original. Some films do a better job of it, while others seem to not even be trying, at least to this viewer.

    A decent enough way to kill a few hrs, but that's about it.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    edited April 2017 Posts: 9,020
    Good to see love for a movie that in almost 20 years never left my Top 10, up to 2006 it was in my Top 5 even.

    Top 5 in 2006:
    GE
    TLD
    OHMSS
    TND
    CR

    TND confirmed that Brosnan was the right choice.
    EON played it safe and gave the people what they wanted.
    It may be formulaic but that what people love about Bond, you know what you get.
    To throw in something unusual like LTK, QOS or SF every now or then works only because people know they'll get a typical Bond movie again, hence SP's phenomenal success at the BO.


    I searched for an TND appreciation thread, found this, and thought I write something about the film only to see I already made the short post above nearly a year ago.

    My statement still is 100% true for me.

    I prepared this post a while ago, now it's time to actually post it as I will watch the film in a few days.

    Here is what I think of the film, a short review of sorts. A love letter to the film.

    Tomorrow Never Dies usually gets too much flack because it followed the perfect GoldenEye.
    As the original posts suggest, TND may be very formulaic and I think because of that it gets treated unfairly sometimes on this forum.
    Outside, in the real world, so to speak, I know no one who doesn't love the film.
    In 1997 it was a great success and proved that Brosnan's GoldenEye wasn't an exception.

    The film has it all. Take the PTS for instance. It's almost a mini-film in itself with a great, great M in it, Judi Dench's definite take on the role and her best appearance in any Bond film.

    The action is breathtaking, realistic and very well shot, edited and the score is one of the best in the series. WHITE KNIGHT an epic 8:30 minutes opus that proves to me that David Arnold was the new John Barry.

    How EON could replace Arnold with that joke that is doing the scores nowadays will forever escape me. They should have sacked Mendes on the spot and taken a director that respects Bond's legacy.

    The Devonshire sequence is evoking TSWLM in a great way. Stamper already established himself as one of the best and most original henchman. And he is so much more really, while most henchman were rather silent, Stamper talks and talks and talks, which is a delight. Not to mention his appearance. Big, muscular, mean looking, blonde, so German stereotyped but oh so fun.

    Bond's first interaction with Carver is fantastic. How he provokes Carver so subtly and Jonathan Pryce does a fantastic acting job. His first scenes in his media commando center are great and he already becomes one of the more memorable and realistic villains in that scene. Later on he has some borderline silly moments, but they are just very few and just to compare it to my love-to-hate villain Silva it is still little, considering what awful overacted scenes Bardem gives in SF, lots of them.

    Paris Carver is not very memorable, although Hatcher does look great and she doesn't bother me at all, she is just one of the weakest Bond girls that is all, forgettable but never annoying.

    Brosnan and Desmond, that's a love story. Desmond was great with all five actors but with Brosnan it produces always the most fun scenes. The screaming red suit Q wears in Berlin is a hoot, so is his interaction with Bond.

    Moneypenny in the Brosnan-era fit in perfectly. Samantha Bond clearly was a worthy successor to Lois. You can never outdo Lois, but that's not the point.
    One of the bigger flaws of the Craig era is to have dismissed Moneypenny as a character in the first two films.

    Wai Lin. Well, I always loved her and always will. She is not the typical Bond girl at all, she is quite unique and therefore the "formulaic" argument goes right out the window there.
    She is more like a side-kick to Bond, they are on the same level almost, she is a capable agent, he is a capable agent.
    The actress was well known before Bond and still, her Wai Lin is one of her best and memorable roles ever.

    What makes TND work so well, is that it is faced paced and there is always a great score that accompanies every scene. David Arnold has provided us with five gems of Bond scores. Only because there are so many John Barry scores, that fact seems to be forgotten sometimes.

    The direction of the film is quite good as well. There is nothing to complain about really. Especially now that we got "artists" Marc Forster and Sam Mendes, we should realise that someone like Spottiswoode would do the current era good.

    The plot of TND is the best, clearly the best, that P+W have written. It is easy to understand, contains no unnecessary stupid plot twists and doesn't play or fool around with beloved characters like they did in SF and TWINE.

    Many of the sequences in TND stand out and have aged EXTREMELY WELL, especially with some of the things that came afterward from TWINE to QOS.

    Bond breaking into Carver's print center where he meets Wai Lin again, if only briefly. Afterwards he gets a call from Elliot that directs Bond to his hotel room.
    The scene with Dr. Kaufman has to be one of the best written scenes in the series.
    And of course, Vincent in the most original and unique role is unforgettable.
    The goons trying to break into Bond's BMW are priceless and later that got copied somewhat by the Transporter series.

    TND overall has aged very, very well. The story is more relevant than ever and maybe the most timeless ever in any Bond film.

    Brosnan owns the screen in any single scene. Unlike his successor who is sometimes put on a pedestal too high, Brosnan looks and acts the part in every single frame.
    You can tell, this Brosnan in TND loves what he does, is assured and established. He has great fun and this transforms beautifully to the screen.

    Sometimes I read such stuff like Brosnan is too much machine gun toting. But remember that even Roger Moore did a similar thing in TSWLM, and of course Dalton as well.
    But because it's Brosnan it is a valid point for some. As if Craigbond would be any less of a video game ego shooter character.

    TOMORROW NEVER DIES has great car/bike chases. Unique, original and very fun to watch!
    Wai Lin and Bond, that's not the typical Bond/Girl relationship. Both are agents fighting against Carver and they are a team.
    Wai Lin's lair and what happens there is bloody great. One of my favourite scenes in the film.

    The film has it all. But because it is quite formulaic in many places, not all mind you, it gets some flack.

    Nowadays many Bond fans would be glad we would get more of such stuff. SPECTRE is a step in the right direction and I suspect that Bond 25 will be an even further step into that direction that Spectre took us. Which will be a good thing.
  • edited April 2017 Posts: 616
    In addition to the formulaic writing and unimaginative direction, the film has shockingly bad photography that somehow manages to deglamorize the leads. Teri Hatcher and Michelle Yeoh are two of the most beautiful actresses in the world, but you wouldn't know it based on this film.
  • Posts: 15,803
    I can remember being mildly disappointed when I saw it opening night. I felt the climax aboard the Stealth boat was too generic and more Die Hard or Jean Claude Van Damme than Bond. At the time my least favorites would have been AVTAK or TMWTGG and I was a bit gutted that the new film was so formulaic as to possibly rival those as my least favorite entry.
    Then I saw it again the following night with a group as part of a Bond themed party and my misgivings faded. Here was an entry that was almost an homage to TSWLM and FYEO, two of my favorite Moore films. In addition, David Arnold's score redeemed the series' music from both Eric Serra and Michael Kamen. Finally a Bond film that sounded like a Bond film. In addition, Brosnan was great and IMO looked far better here than in GE.

    Interestingly, I watched QOS today and was a bit turned away by the lack of Bondian formula there. Twenty years after the release of TND what I wouldn't give to see a new film along those lines that embraces the formula so strongly.
  • Posts: 533
    I would say that it's a tie between "GOLDFINGER" and "TOMORROW NEVER DIES".
  • Posts: 226
    It was definitely one of my more watched/enjoyed Bond films of the early to mid 2000's. It wasn't until the Craig era came around, that I put the Brosnan films on the shelf for awhile. And realistically, they are still pretty shelved with the exception of GE. Nothing against his films or his era, as I have always enjoyed his tenure as Bond. I remember being like 12 or 13 and I was watching TND in my bedroom and my mom walked in during the scene with him and Prof. Bergstrom in bed, and she basically lost her s..t on me.

    GE is the only Brosnan Bond I ever bother to rewatch. It's been so long since I've seen the others.
  • Posts: 226
    I would say it's technically GF, if only because that's what really created the formula, it wasn't formulaic at the time. Other contenders are TB, YOLT, DAF, TSWLM, and SP
    HASEROT wrote: »
    i never bought the sexual attraction between the two... it really came off as forced at the end of the movie.

    Agree, that was one of the movie's many weak points.

  • w2bondw2bond is indeed a very rare breed
    Posts: 2,252
    The plot of TND is the best, clearly the best, that P+W have written. It is easy to understand, contains no unnecessary stupid plot twists and doesn't play or fool around with beloved characters like they did in SF and TWINE.

    The plot is the best because P+W didn't write it!
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    edited April 2017 Posts: 9,020
    w2bond wrote: »
    The plot of TND is the best, clearly the best, that P+W have written. It is easy to understand, contains no unnecessary stupid plot twists and doesn't play or fool around with beloved characters like they did in SF and TWINE.

    The plot is the best because P+W didn't write it!

    Yes. Now I know. My mistake and it's rather telling that P+W started with their worst script by far (TWINE) and recycled it for SF plus stole GE's idea of Alec Trevelyan and made a caricature of him in the form of Silva.
    Not to mention the obvious Dark Knight copy paste job they did. Deplorable.
  • Yes it's formulaic. Is that necessarily a bad thing? Of course not. We could do with a more formulaic film for B25.
  • suavejmfsuavejmf Harrogate, North Yorkshire, England
    Posts: 5,131
    It was good to see this Bond flick reflect some of the themes of the 1990s, balancing this with the traditional Bond formula. To have the villain as a media mogul was a good idea (but he's a limp wristed pantomime style flop), while have a Bond girl in Michelle Yeoh can hold her own against Bond (albeit she is irritating and ranting about Western corruption - when it's her colleagues/ countrymen causing the issues!), rather than be an accessory.

    The first hour is very good, with a great score. The second hour (post Halo Jump) is a generic bore with some very ropey sets!

    David Arnold's score manages to bring some classic Bond score elements into the film and at times it s hard to believe that Barry didn't compose of the music. The music accompanying the teaser sequence is reminiscent of some of the classic Barry action music of the early Bond films and the music manages to play incredibly well into the scenes were suspense is most needed.

    The films over reliance on a over the top storyline, action sequences, and two weak major supporting characters, hurts the film considerably to the point of dropping down to a below average Bond film.
  • Posts: 11,189
    I'd definitely say it's one of the most lightweight Bond films.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited April 2017 Posts: 23,883
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    I'd definitely say it's one of the most lightweight Bond films.
    Very much so. Strictly a 'by the numbers' box ticking exercise. The pacing is very good, as is the audacity of some of the stunts, but the film is missing something essential however, and that is interesting characters. There is really no one in the film that I care about or am remotely interested in, and so it's all instantly forgettable to me. Even DAD has memorable characters in it, even if it's the type that we love to hate. The same goes for that PoS TWINE.
  • Posts: 19,339
    bondjames wrote: »
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    I'd definitely say it's one of the most lightweight Bond films.
    Very much so. Strictly a 'by the numbers' box ticking exercise. The pacing is very good, as is the audacity of some of the stunts, but the film is missing something essential however, and that is interesting characters. There is really no one in the film that I care about or am remotely interested in, and so it's all instantly forgettable to me. Even DAD has memorable characters in it, even if it's the type that we love to hate. The same goes for that PoS TWINE.


    I actually think that if you took Arnold's brilliant score and stuck a Newman one in instead then the film would collapse.
    It's important not to underestimate just how much that Arnold score brings to the film.

  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    barryt007 wrote: »
    bondjames wrote: »
    BAIN123 wrote: »
    I'd definitely say it's one of the most lightweight Bond films.
    Very much so. Strictly a 'by the numbers' box ticking exercise. The pacing is very good, as is the audacity of some of the stunts, but the film is missing something essential however, and that is interesting characters. There is really no one in the film that I care about or am remotely interested in, and so it's all instantly forgettable to me. Even DAD has memorable characters in it, even if it's the type that we love to hate. The same goes for that PoS TWINE.


    I actually think that if you took Arnold's brilliant score and stuck a Newman one in instead then the film would collapse.
    It's important not to underestimate just how much that Arnold score brings to the film.
    I know many think highly of it, but Arnold's score does nothing for me. There are some interesting motifs, but ultimately like the film it falls flat for me. I recall walking out of the theatre feeling empty, which was the opposite feeling I had after watching GE. The precipitous decline had begun with this entry in my view and just accelerated with the next two.
  • RareJamesBondFanRareJamesBondFan Touch it. You can touch it if you want.
    Posts: 132
    Yes and no. Its hard to say.
  • edited April 2020 Posts: 4,400
    Interesting article about how TND is the most entertaining Brosnan film and the most overlooked Bond film...
    https://film.avclub.com/tomorrow-never-dies-is-an-underrated-adventure-for-pier-1842655791

    tumblr_pf9scgu22u1s12hlbo2_500.gifv
    tumblr_peyhz3fU5b1s12hlbo2_540.gifv

    Michelle Yeoh really should have been the lead in another Bond flick....
This discussion has been closed.