Controversial opinions about Bond films

1345346348350351705

Comments

  • peterpeter Toronto
    edited August 2017 Posts: 8,504
    Controversial opinion:

    I have read on these forums that, even some of the SP haters, give love to the Bond/White scene.

    I can't remember if I posted here, but I don't like this scene at all.

    I love the concept of the scene very much: two assassins, and opponents, coming face-to-face, after several years, both being at very different points in their lives...

    However, even upon my first viewing, I found the execution of their meeting, cheap in all ways, starting with:

    The set: it looked like a set. Which means cheap...

    The shots: static. Boring.

    The actors: I love these two in their roles, but all they did was "act" and "bark" and I could "hear" the script.

    This was a scene I was looking forward to... and, in the end, I was very underwhelmed...
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,504
    Yes, @Birdleson, I wish they didn't show White AT ALL in the promos... Could you imagine your shock if you didn't know White was back, and what he was looking like?...

    In the end, the best part of this sequence, was White killing himself in such a graphic and desperate way.

    Like you, I love White (and I wished he was Blofeld-- with "White" only being a code-name)... Damn, he's so much better than Waltz!!
  • RichardTheBruceRichardTheBruce I'm motivated by my Duty.
    Posts: 13,032
    Everybody else goes there.
    aHR0cDovL2ltZzIuaW1ndG4uYmRpbWcuY29tL2l0L3U9MTY1MTYxMTk5Miw0MjQ5ODQ4ODQmZm09MjMmZ3A9MC5qcGc=.jpgTarzans-New-York-Adventure-1942-203x300.jpg1333217379_gerkules-v-nyu-yorke.jpg
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    edited August 2017 Posts: 2,730
    peter wrote: »
    @BMW_with_missiles , I'm not sure to take your gif as you agree with me, or; mocking my comment; if it's the latter, then, oh well, I guess...

    It's my opinion that Bond, whether SC vs Grant, or DC vs the above, seems in real danger against real men. When Bond is against Hans, Jaws, Bautista-types, we know he's a-ok and we watch the tropes play out like a WWE fight.

    Fighting Slate is fresh.

    I liked batista but looking at your point, i also would like to point out thatl we had established in this universe that Daniel Craig was more or less indistructable( unless tied to a chair) and that he was this force of death that could kill anyone. they even give greene an Axe at the end of quantum and its still not even a fair fight, to then in spectre show us that oh weve decided hes like the moore bond now and can be beaten up hand to hand. I dont like it, it doesnt make sense with his character and it underminds his brutality. Although it is a great fight
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,331
    He wasn't immune to getting hurt. He just bounced back quicker. But everyone he fought was no match for him. He was usually bigger than everyone he fought. Bring in Hinx and now he's finally fighting someone more than a match for him.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    Everybody else goes there.
    aHR0cDovL2ltZzIuaW1ndG4uYmRpbWcuY29tL2l0L3U9MTY1MTYxMTk5Miw0MjQ5ODQ4ODQmZm09MjMmZ3A9MC5qcGc=.jpgTarzans-New-York-Adventure-1942-203x300.jpg1333217379_gerkules-v-nyu-yorke.jpg

    I think you prove my point there Sir.
  • Posts: 170
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Not a controversial opinion as much as a controversial feeling: when I first watched OHMSS as a child (well, from the assault on Piz Gloria to the end) I was happy or at least relieved that Tracy got killed. So Bond could keep on bedding other women.

    You were thinking about Bond bedding other women when you were a child! Bloody hell man when did you start puberty?
  • RoadphillRoadphill United Kingdom
    Posts: 984
    An opinion that may cause controversy. Daniel Craig's era has been the worst of any Bond's.
  • Mendes4LyfeMendes4Lyfe The long road ahead
    Posts: 8,087
    Roadphill wrote: »
    An opinion that may cause controversy. Daniel Craig's era has been the worst of any Bond's.

    I agree.
  • Posts: 170
    Roadphill wrote: »
    An opinion that may cause controversy. Daniel Craig's era has been the worst of any Bond's.

    Not controversial in my book. It's very close with Brosnan. I would give Craig era the edge over the tacky Brosnan era myself. His last 3 just seem so cheap & dated (in a bad way) when I watch them now. They seem to herald the dawn of those tacky forgotton action films that polluted the start of the 21st. Mind you we seem to have got something even worse now with all the crap Marvel is pumping out at a rate of knots. Once watched, the next day forgotten.
  • Posts: 12,269
    Roadphill wrote: »
    An opinion that may cause controversy. Daniel Craig's era has been the worst of any Bond's.

    Definitely have to disagree myself and say Brosnan's era was objectively and subjectively the worst. GE is the only one of his films that is generally well-liked, and for me personally, the only above-average Bond film he did. His era lacked originality and felt like the most generic of the bunch. TND and TWINE are both mostly okay but not really exceptional in many ways. DAD is a disaster after the first 30-ish minutes.

    IMO, both CR and SF are Bond masterpieces and get the praise they deserve. QoS and SP both have some big flaws, and depending on personal preference one may or may not like them more than Brosnan's films - or some of them anyway. I think Craig's era, while not perfect, has far more memorable moments and far better intensity while not losing the humor like some people suggest. On that note, I should also add the humor in the Brosnan era is the weakest IMO.
  • Posts: 12,269
    For me, excluding Lazenby and Dalton, I rank the eras as:

    1. Sean Connery
    2. Daniel Craig
    3. Roger Moore
    4. Pierce Brosnan

    Craig and Moore is close, but Moore had a couple more serious meh ones IMO (MR AVTAK for me).
  • Posts: 6,819
    Well even though he only did two, i would put Dalton on top.
    1. Dalton
    2. Connery/Craig
    3. Moore
    4. Brosnan
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited August 2017 Posts: 23,883
    Roadphill wrote: »
    An opinion that may cause controversy. Daniel Craig's era has been the worst of any Bond's.
    I still think his era is quite a bit better than Brosnan's and he's given us two crackers (CR & SF imho) but I'm really over it now.

    Upon my last viewing of TLD & LTK, I have found new appreciation for Dalton's take. He brought a sincere wounded humanity to the role without needing all this backstory baggage, and I applaud him for that. I realize now that it couldn't have been an easy thing to do, given the times.
  • Posts: 12,269
    I like TLD and really like LTK. Pretty decent Bond outings; not the greatest or worst IMO.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    FoxRox wrote: »
    I like TLD and really like LTK. Pretty decent Bond outings; not the greatest or worst IMO.
    I agree. Pretty decent is a good way of putting it.
  • Posts: 14,831
    The_Donald wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Not a controversial opinion as much as a controversial feeling: when I first watched OHMSS as a child (well, from the assault on Piz Gloria to the end) I was happy or at least relieved that Tracy got killed. So Bond could keep on bedding other women.

    You were thinking about Bond bedding other women when you were a child! Bloody hell man when did you start puberty?

    Well not bedding but seducing them.
  • RoadphillRoadphill United Kingdom
    Posts: 984
    Yeah @bondjames the Dalton films are solid. Both upper middle efforts.

    I should begin by saying I think Casino Royale is a top notch Bond effort. The rest of the Craig films are the nadir of the series for me.

    QOS has too many scenes blatantly, and poorly ripped off from better Bond films, and is chopped to bits by the editing.

    SF is extremely pretentious, and somehow seems to be both too low key and bloated at the same time. The action is devoid of any tension or spectacle. The villain is poor facsimile of the Joker from the Dark Knight. The idiotic notion that Bond is washed up just a couple of years removed from CR.

    SP ditto on the action(apart from the train fight, in fairness) retconning the last few films, and the absolutely rotten foster brother debacle, not to mention a crap ending.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited August 2017 Posts: 23,883
    I can understand where you're coming from @Roadphill.

    I really like SF because of the visuals, atmosphere, character interaction and style (which was a welcome return to form after QoS's choppiness) but I can appreciate why many don't like that film. It's style over substance with some grand Mendes themes operating in the background. An interesting 'one off'. That's where it should have been left imho, but sadly its massive success led to a poorly conceived redux.

    I think regardless of how one feels about the Craig efforts, there is a building mood for change just like there was in the early 00's. It's not overwhelming yet, but it's gathering steam. Who knows how we'll all feel 2 years from now.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    Roadphill wrote: »
    Yeah @bondjames the Dalton films are solid. Both upper middle efforts.

    I should begin by saying I think Casino Royale is a top notch Bond effort. The rest of the Craig films are the nadir of the series for me.

    QOS has too many scenes blatantly, and poorly ripped off from better Bond films, and is chopped to bits by the editing.

    SF is extremely pretentious, and somehow seems to be both too low key and bloated at the same time. The action is devoid of any tension or spectacle. The villain is poor facsimile of the Joker from the Dark Knight. The idiotic notion that Bond is washed up just a couple of years removed from CR.

    SP ditto on the action(apart from the train fight, in fairness) retconning the last few films, and the absolutely rotten foster brother debacle, not to mention a crap ending.

    I find myself struggling to argue with any of your points despite being a fan of the Craig era.
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    peter wrote: »
    @BMW_with_missiles , I'm not sure to take your gif as you agree with me, or; mocking my comment; if it's the latter, then, oh well, I guess...

    It's my opinion that Bond, whether SC vs Grant, or DC vs the above, seems in real danger against real men. When Bond is against Hans, Jaws, Bautista-types, we know he's a-ok and we watch the tropes play out like a WWE fight.

    Fighting Slate is fresh.

    I liked batista but looking at your point, i also didnt like that we had established in this universe that Daniel Craig was more or less indistructable( unless tied to a chair) and that he wad this force of death that could kill anyone they even give greene an Axe at the end of quantum and its still not even a fair fight, to then in spectre show us that oh weve decided hes like the moore bond now and can be beaten up hand to hand. I dont like it, it doesnt make sense with his character and it underminds his brutality. Although it is a great fight
    Ludovico wrote: »
    The_Donald wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Not a controversial opinion as much as a controversial feeling: when I first watched OHMSS as a child (well, from the assault on Piz Gloria to the end) I was happy or at least relieved that Tracy got killed. So Bond could keep on bedding other women.

    You were thinking about Bond bedding other women when you were a child! Bloody hell man when did you start puberty?

    Well not bedding but seducing them.

    When I was a "kid" I though CR was the most sexually explicit film ever produced
  • Posts: 12,269
    Roadphill wrote: »
    Yeah @bondjames the Dalton films are solid. Both upper middle efforts.

    I should begin by saying I think Casino Royale is a top notch Bond effort. The rest of the Craig films are the nadir of the series for me.

    QOS has too many scenes blatantly, and poorly ripped off from better Bond films, and is chopped to bits by the editing.

    SF is extremely pretentious, and somehow seems to be both too low key and bloated at the same time. The action is devoid of any tension or spectacle. The villain is poor facsimile of the Joker from the Dark Knight. The idiotic notion that Bond is washed up just a couple of years removed from CR.

    SP ditto on the action(apart from the train fight, in fairness) retconning the last few films, and the absolutely rotten foster brother debacle, not to mention a crap ending.

    Agreed on CR; my #1 Bond film.

    QOS indeed has questionable editing, but it's still unique in that it's the first direct sequel in the series and has the most realistic villains. Definitely flawed, but I believe it stands apart in good ways too.

    I personally disagree SF's action lacks tension or spectacle; the PTS and finale had plenty of spectacle for my taste. The scene where Bond chases and fights Patrice has good tension IMO. Silva and Joker, though similar, still have key differences - Silva's main target is M and he is more specific than Joker (who targets a lot of people), and also still has several of his own quirks. Bond being washed up plot point I will agree is sort of weak - probably my least favorite aspect of the film.

    I think the PTS and snow chase have plenty of spectacle in SP. I will agree the finale is far too generic though and lacks big tension. The foster brother thing I think is over-hated but is still a meh plot point. As for the retconning, making Quantum part of Spectre clicks pretty well for me, but I didn't like that they included Silva being a Spectre agent.
  • Posts: 15,818
    Roadphill wrote: »
    An opinion that may cause controversy. Daniel Craig's era has been the worst of any Bond's.

    Lot's of good responses to this one. I'm feeling once the Craig era is over, it will be easier for me to judge. However, that said, at the moment it's very much leaning toward being my least favorite era in the franchise as well.
    The Craig era feels like an interminable space of time in which not much happens, except an occasional film, and when it does , it's in an effort to distinguish itself from previous eras but attempting something different. However, it calls attention to itself by disregarding elements that audiences and fans already loved about the series.
  • I'm in the minority I think because I really prefer the last two Craig films to the first two. CR I like, can actually find very few flaws in it, but I've always respected it more than I actually enjoyed it. The Venice stuff makes it feel bloated and I never liked the origin story angle. QoS is my least favourite Bond film. A rushed pretentious mess. SF I thought was a great step back in the right direction and a very good top ten Bond film but it was felt extremely smug and pretentious, and although the finale was brilliant I thought a lot of the action felt a bit bland and by the numbers. SP I loved and it was basically the film I'd been waiting for since CR. Top five for me.
  • RoadphillRoadphill United Kingdom
    Posts: 984
    @ToTheRight you have hit the nail on the head, sir.
  • Posts: 15,818
    Roadphill wrote: »
    @ToTheRight you have hit the nail on the head, sir.

    Thanks. The Craig era had departed from Bondian formula in such a way it almost feels ashamed of it's cinematic heritage. Yet the attempt to get back to it's cinematic roots in SP was slightly tarnished from the get go by the apparent necessity established in the Craig era to make it personal.
    I do like all 4 films, but I tend to watch them in less than any other era. I really have to be in the mood for SF, whereas I can pretty much pop in FRWL, OHMSS or TSWLM anytime.
  • Posts: 7,500
    Here is another one that might cause controversy:

    LTK has the best plot and story in the series.

    (And the film as a whole is far more than just "solid", mind you...)
  • MajorDSmytheMajorDSmythe "I tolerate this century, but I don't enjoy it."Moderator
    Posts: 13,894
    Not sure about plot/story, but it definitely has the best action sequences of the series.
  • Posts: 6,819
    jobo wrote: »
    Here is another one that might cause controversy:

    LTK has the best plot and story in the series.

    (And the film as a whole is far more than just "solid", mind you...)

    I agree. It has a good story that develops and builds to a thrilling finish!
  • JamesBondKenyaJamesBondKenya Danny Boyle laughs to himself
    Posts: 2,730
    Okay well there are a number of really good and realistic plots in the bond series
    From russia with Love
    For Your Eyes Only
    The living daylights
    License to kill
    Casino Royale
    Quantum of Solace
Sign In or Register to comment.